Tuesday, Jun 10, 2003
Front Page |
Southern States |
Other States |
Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Obituary |
By J. Venkatesan
A vacation Bench, comprising Justice R.C. Lahoti and Justice Brijesh Kumar, dismissed the plea of Naved Yar Khan seeking permission to file the special leave petition. The Bench, however, said the petitioner could approach the High Court.
The petitioner submitted that the order for excavation would prove to be a bad precedent as now anybody could demand the excavation of any religious site on the pretext that another religious structure existed before the present one.
He said the excavation order violated the 1994 order of the apex court directing the maintenance of the status quo at the disputed site till the High Court decided the issues in the title suits.
On March 31, the Supreme Court dismissed a writ petition filed by Mr. Khan as he failed to cure the defect pointed out by the Registry, viz., only a special leave petition could be filed against a High Court order and not a writ petition. On March 25, he was granted a week's time to cure the defect and file a fresh petition but he did not do so.
Mr. Khan contended that the High Court order had resulted in a situation wherein one community was allowed to continue its worship and the other was made to suffer the damage caused by the Babri Masjid demolition of December 6, 1992, which affected the community's 400 years of religious faith.
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription
Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | The Hindu eBooks | Home |
Copyright © 2003, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of