{"id":223227,"date":"2019-12-12T20:02:52","date_gmt":"2019-12-12T14:32:52","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=223227"},"modified":"2019-12-12T20:02:52","modified_gmt":"2019-12-12T14:32:52","slug":"ayodhya-all-petitions-seeking-review-of-the-5-judge-bench-ayodhya-verdict-dismissed","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/12\/12\/ayodhya-all-petitions-seeking-review-of-the-5-judge-bench-ayodhya-verdict-dismissed\/","title":{"rendered":"Ayodhya| All petitions seeking review of the 5-judge bench Ayodhya verdict dismissed"},"content":{"rendered":"

Supreme Court<\/strong>: The 5-judge bench headed by SA Bobde, CJ has dismissed a batch of petitions seeking review of its November 9 Ayodhya land dispute<\/a> verdict, which cleared the way for construction of a Ram Temple at the disputed site. The bench\u00a0took these review pleas for consideration in-chamber, rejected them after finding no merits.<\/p>\n

On November 9, the 5-judge bench of Ranjan Gogoi, CJ, S.A. Bobde, Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan and S. Abdul Nazeer, JJ, sat down on a Saturday morning, otherwise a holiday, to finally put an end to the Ayodhya Title dispute and held that the disputed land is to be given to Trust for construction of Ram Mandir. In an effort to balance the interest of both the parties involved, the Court directed \u00a0that a suitable plot of 5 acres must be granted to Sunni Waqf Board to set up a Mosque<\/a>. The sensitivity of the issue was evident from the fact that the1045 pages long \u2018unanimous\u2019 verdict was silent on who wrote it<\/span>.<\/em>\u00a0One of the 5-judges wrote a separate but concurring opinion on the issue whether disputed structure is the holy birthplace of Lord Ram as per the faith, belief and trust of the Hindus. The name of the judge was, however, not disclosed as well.<\/p>\n

After noticing that the allotment of in respect of the possessory claim of the Hindus to the composite whole of the disputed property stands on a better footing than the evidence adduced by the Muslims, the Court gave the following directions:<\/p>\n