SC for out-of-court settlement of Ayodhya land dispute

The Supreme Court today suggested an out-of-court settlement of the lingering Ram Janam Bhumi- Babri Masjid land dispute at Ayodhya, observing that issues of "religion and sentiments" can be best resolved through talks.
Chief Justice J S Khehar also offered to mediate even as the bench headed by him suggested that the parties to the dispute adopt a "give a bit and take a bit" approach for a meaningful and sincere negotiations to resolve the issue.
The Lucknow bench of Allahabad High Court, in 2010, had ruled for a three-way division of the disputed 2.77 acres area at the site in Uttar Pradesh.

The three-judge bench, by a majority of 2:1, had said the land be partitioned equally among three parties, Sunni Waqf Board, Nirmohi Akhara and the 'Ram Lalla' (nascent Lord Ram).
The apex court said that such religious issues can be best resolved through negotiations.
"These are issues of religion and sentiments. These are issues where all the parties can sit together and arrive at a consensual decision to end the dispute. These issues are best decided jointly. All of you may sit together and hold a cordial meeting," the bench, also comprising Justices D Y Chandrachud and S K Kaul, said.

The observations were made after BJP leader Subramanian Swamy mentioned the matter seeking urgent hearing, saying that it has been over six years after the High Court decided the civil appeal and that it needed to be heard at the earliest.

The BJP Parliamentarian told the court that he had approached the Muslim community members who favoured judicial decision in the contentious matter.
"You (Swamy) must make fresh attempts to arrive at a consensual decision. If required, you must choose a mediator to end the dispute. If the parties wants me (CJI) to sit with mediators chosen by both the sides for negotiations, I am ready to take up the task.

"Even the services of my brother judges can be availed for the purpose," the CJI said.
Earlier, on February 26 last year, the apex court had
allowed Swamy to intervene in the pending matters relating to the Ayodhya title dispute with his plea seeking construction of Ram temple at the site of the demolished disputed structure.
The BJP leader had moved the plea for a direction to allow construction of the Ram temple at Ayodhya at the disputed site and had mentioned it before a bench headed by then Chief Justice T S Thakur for an urgent hearing.
In his petition, Swamy had claimed that under the practices prevalent in Islamic countries, a mosque could be shifted to any other place for public purposes like constructing road, whereas a temple once constructed cannot be touched.

He had also sought directions to expedite the disposal of several petitions challenging the Allahabad High Court verdict of three-way division of the disputed Ram Janam Bhumi-Babri Masjid site at Ayodhya on September 30, 2010.
The dispute before the court was whether the 2.7 acres of disputed land on which the Babri Masjid stood before it was demolished on December 6, 1992, belongs to the Sunni Central Waqf Board or to the Akhil Bharat Hindu Mahasabha.
The Allahabad HC, by a majority verdict, had ruled for a 3-way division of the disputed area.
It had directed that the disputed site of 2.77 acres be partitioned equally among three parties.