LIVE TV DownloadNews18 App
News18 English
»
1-min read

Ayodhya Mediation: Top 5 Things You Should Know About the Supreme Court Order

The three-member mediation panel will be headed by former Supreme Court judge FM Kalifullah, with spiritual leader Sri Sri Ravi Shankar and, lawyer and mediation expert Sriram Panchu as other members.

News18.com

Updated:March 8, 2019, 5:15 PM IST
facebookTwittergoogleskypewhatsapp
Loading...
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday referred the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid land dispute case in Ayodhya for mediation. Fourteen appeals have been filed in the apex court against the 2010 Allahabad High Court judgment, delivered in four civil suits, that the 2.77-acre land in Ayodhya be partitioned equally among the three parties — the Sunni Waqf Board, the Nirmohi Akhara and Ram Lalla.

Here are top five things to know in the Supreme Court order:

- The three-member mediation panel will be headed by former Supreme Court judge FM Kalifullah, with spiritual leader Sri Sri Ravi Shankar and, lawyer and mediation expert Sriram Panchu as other members.

- The panel is expected to finish the mediation process within eight weeks, from March 15 to May 15, when the country will be gearing up for the results of the Lok Sabha elections.

- The panel will have to submit the first status report on the mediation process within four weeks.

- The mediation process will be held in Uttar Pradesh’s Faizabad district where the disputed site is location. The district was recently renamed as Ayodhya.

- The media has been barred from reporting on the mediation process to maintain confidentiality.

A five-judge Constitution Bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi had on Wednesday had reserved the order after hearing various contesting parties. Hindu bodies except Nirmohi Akhara had opposed the suggestion of the apex court to refer the issue for mediation, while Muslim bodies had supported it.


The apex court in its Wednesday hearing had observed that primarily the issue is not about 1,500 square feet land, but about religious sentiments. The bench had said it was conscious of the gravity and impact of the issue on "public sentiment" and also on "body politics of the country". It has also said that the judges were aware of the history and was seeing that the dispute be resolved amicably as "It is not only about property. It is about mind, heart and healing, if possible."



Read full article
Loading...
Next Story
Next Story

Also Watch

facebookTwittergoogleskypewhatsapp

Live TV

Loading...
Countdown To Elections Results
  • 01 d
  • 12 h
  • 38 m
  • 09 s
To Assembly Elections 2018 Results