look news india
Varanasi, 25 October (Hindustan Reporter). In the original 32-year-old case of Gyanvapi, on Friday, the court of Civil Judge Senior Division Fast Track Court Yugul Shambhu rejected the application of litigation friend Vijay Shankar Rastogi. This decision of the court has dealt a big blow to the plaintiff Hindu side.
The fast track court said in its order that the remaining part of the ASI survey is protected on the orders of the Supreme Court. Along with this, the plaintiff party has not presented any solid reason for demanding a complete survey. Therefore further survey is not necessary.
Advocate Vijay Shankar Rastogi and his advocate Madan Mohan said that we will challenge the order of the lower court in Allahabad High Court. A copy of the court order is awaited. Vadamitra said that the previous ASI survey was incomplete. Without excavation it is not possible to present a correct report. Therefore, a demand was made to conduct excavation in Gyanvapi area. Waju Khana, below the main dome has not been surveyed. The survey has been done only by the ASI team whereas the High Court had ordered that a team of five members had to be assembled for it. An expert from a central university was also supposed to be there but this was not done. ASI cannot give correct report without excavation.
Before this, in the Lord Vishweshwar case of 1991 related to Gyanvapi, the advocates of the defendant party Anjuman Intezamia Masjid Committee had presented their side in the court. Advocates of Masjid Committee and Waqf Board, in their respective arguments, had opposed the ASI survey by digging in Gyanvapi. Also, details and copies of many decisions of Allahabad High Court and Supreme Court were presented before the court. After completion of arguments of both the parties in this case, the court reserved the files for orders. In the earlier hearing, counter arguments were given by litigation friend Vijay Shankar Rastogi.
It is noteworthy that in the Lord Vishweshwar case of 1991, the plaintiff Hindu side had claimed that there was a Shivalinga under the central dome of Gyanvapi. The plaintiff party, through a suit, demanded from the court to excavate the remaining site of the Gyanvapi complex and conduct an ASI survey. The plaintiff party had also presented arguments in the court demanding ASI survey of area numbers 9131 and 9132. In the year 1991, the case was filed by advocates Dan Bahadur, Somnath Vyas, Dr. Ramrang Sharma and Harihar Pandey. Amidst the hearing, in 1998, the opposition went to the High Court and took a stay in the case. After the Supreme Court order in 2018, the stay became ineffective, in 2019 the Hindu side again demanded an ASI survey.