rediff.com
rediff.com
News
      HOME | NEWS | THE AYODHYA ISSUE | REPORT
Thursday
March 14, 2002
1502 IST

NEWSLINKS
US EDITION
SOUTH ASIA
COLUMNISTS
DIARY
SPECIALS
INTERVIEWS
CAPITAL BUZZ
REDIFF POLL
DEAR REDIFF
THE STATES
ELECTIONS
ARCHIVES
US ARCHIVES
SEARCH REDIFF







 Special Offer

 To your parents'
 health



 Click for India's
 best painters


 Search the Internet
         Tips
E-Mail this report to a friend
Print this page Best Printed on HP Laserjets



SC clarifies its Ayodhya order

The Supreme Court on Thursday clarified that the status quo ordered by it at the acquired site in Ayodhya covered the whole of the land vested with the central government.

The clarification was issued by a three-judge bench comprising Justice B N Kirpal, Justice G B Pattanaik and Justice V N Khare.

A report had said on Thursday that Wednesday's order covered only two revenue plots in village Kot Ramchandra, whereas the acquired land encompassed over 100 revenue plots spread over three villages.

The modified order makes it clear that it also covered the land described in the Schedule to the Acquisition of Certain Areas at Ayodhya Act, 1993.

"In the meantime, we direct that on this 67.703 acres of land located in revenue plot nos 159 and 160 in village Kot Ramchandra, as well as and including the land described in the schedule to the Acquisition of Certain Areas at Ayodhya Act, 1993 (Act No 33/1993), which is vested in the central government, no religious activity of any kind by anyone, either symbolic or actual, including bhumi puja or shila puja shall be permitted or allowed to take place," said Thursday's modified order.

Later, Attorney General Soli Sorabjee pointed out to the court that there are 14 temples in the acquired land, where regular pujas were being conducted. He wanted to know if the court's order applied to these temples too.

The judges asked the attorney general to move a proper application if he wanted a clarification in this regard.

"We are giving this order (the clarification) only to clarify the minor ambiguity (which arose from Singhal's statement). We are not hearing anything else on this issue," the judges ruled.

PTI

The Ayodhya Issue: Complete Coverage

Back to top

Tell us what you think of this report

ADVERTISEMENT      
NEWS | MONEY | SPORTS | MOVIES | CHAT | CRICKET | SEARCH
ASTROLOGY | CONTESTS | E-CARDS | NEWSLINKS | ROMANCE | WOMEN
SHOPPING | BOOKS | MUSIC | PERSONAL HOMEPAGES | FREE EMAIL| MESSENGER | FEEDBACK