Apex court’s Ayodhya order welcomed by Hindus, Muslims
By IANSTuesday, September 28, 2010
LUCKNOW - The Supreme Court’s decision to clear the decks for pronouncing the verdict on the decades-old Ayodhya litigation has been welcomed by all quarters - both Hindus and Muslims - here.
Vinay Katiyar, Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) vice president, who is also a former BJP MP from Faizabad - Ayodhya, hailed the verdict. “It is such a big relief that the country’s highest court has turned down the plea for deferment of the verdict, which was only a conspiracy to put the issue in cold storage,” he told reporters.
Babri Masjid Action Committee (BMAC) convenor and All India Muslim Personal Law Board member Zafaryab Jilani echoed the sentiment. “There is no doubt that some people were only interested in letting the issue linger on for several more years; but we are grateful to the honourable Supreme Court of India, which has scuttled their designs. I am sure this will make everyone happy,” Jilani told IANS over telephone from New Delhi.
Ramjanmabhoomi Trust chief Mahant Nritya Gopal Das, who is regarded as the most respected sadhu of Ayodhya, too welcomed the apex court decision, which he felt “was clearly in the larger interest of the nation”. According to him, “haven’t we already waited long enough; remember justice delayed is justice denied”.
Maulana Khalid Rasheed, the Naib Imam of Lucknow’s Eidgah and head of the city’s oldest Islamic seminary Firangi Mahal, as well as saffron-clad Swami Ram Vilas Vedanti, an aggressive member of the Ram Janmabhoomi Trust, too welcomed the order with equal enthusiasm. “Whatever be the final court verdict, at least it is going to be open at long last,” was the common refrain of both.
It was significant that both religious as well as political leaders on the two sides were particular about appealing to the masses to “maintain peace and harmony irrespective of which side the scales tilt”.
The Lucknow bench of Allahabad High Court is to pronounce the verdict in the Babri Masjid-Ramjanmabhoomi land dispute on Sep 30.
This follows the Supreme Court’s rejection of a plea to postpone the verdict for a period of three months to enable rival sides to work out an out-of-court amicable settlement.
