The committee overseeing the Shahi Masjid Eidgah in Mathura, Uttar Pradesh, has made a serious accusation against the central government. They claim the government is intentionally delaying its response to legal challenges against the Places of Worship Act of 1991. This important case is currently before the Supreme Court, where the committee has formally argued that the government’s lack of action is a planned strategy to disrupt the proceedings. The core issue at hand is the Places of Worship Act, which has significant implications for religious sites across India.
Specifically, the committee argues that the government, referred to as the Union of India in legal terms, has not submitted necessary paperwork. This includes a counter-affidavit, a reply, or any other legal documents required at this stage of the court process. Consequently, the committee believes this inaction is not accidental but a calculated effort to slow down the case. They see the government’s silence as a deliberate attempt to prevent the case from moving forward and reaching a resolution.
Therefore, the committee has asked the Supreme Court to take decisive action. They are requesting that the court prohibit the Union of India from submitting any further legal documents related to the case. By doing so, they hope to block the government from further participating in this particular stage of the legal battle. This request shows the committee’s deep concern about what they perceive as unfair delays.
According to their formal application, the committee states the government’s tactic is being used “with the intention to delay the hearing of the” case. This statement highlights the core of their argument: they believe the government is purposefully creating obstacles. The legal challenge to the Places of Worship Act is crucial, because it directly impacts the status and future of religious structures in the country. The committee hopes to expedite the process by preventing further government input.
Now, the Supreme Court is faced with a critical decision. It must consider the committee’s request and carefully weigh the possible effects of its ruling. The court’s decision could have significant implications for the ongoing case and the interpretation of the Places of Worship Act. The coming weeks will likely be crucial as this legal battle moves forward.