New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday sought a
response from the Centre and Uttar Pradesh government on a
plea for removing alleged unreasonable restrictions imposed by
the authorities in Ayodhya on worshipping of Lord Rama in the
temple at the disputed site.
A Bench comprising Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan and
Justices A K Ganguly and B S Chauhan also issued notices to
Faizabad District Commissioner and others on an application
filed by Janata Party chief Subramanian Swamy alleging that
unreasonable and unnecessarily harsh regulations have been
imposed on the puja.
The Bench granted four weeks for filing of the response
and objections to the application and posted the matter for
hearing on August 31.
The Janata Party leader has contended the regulations
imposed on the puja by Uttar Pradesh government in
consultation with the Statutory Receiver, the Commissioner,
Faizabad District, were unreasonable and unnecessarily harsh.
"According to this applicant (Swamy), these (regulations)
are highly derogatory, humiliating and unreasonable and
particularly harsh on aged, infirm or even female devotees,"
the affidavit placed by him in support of his application
before the bench said.
He said the restrictions imposed 16 years ago has been
causing hardships for performing puja.
Swamy had said the matter has to be heard urgently as the
question of public health and morality arises in it and he was
"seeking relief on behalf of the devotees".
Swamy had sought that the "overzealous oppressive
restrictions" be relaxed within the main framework of the
ingredients of the status quo ordered in Section 7(2) of the
Acquisition of Certain Areas Ayodhya Act.
He had submitted that the earlier order of the apex court
on May 10, 1996, directing maintaining of status quo had
stayed all "the humane directions passed by the Allahabad High
Court to facilitate and ameliorate the conditions for Hindu
pilgrims visiting the shrine."
Swamy had further submitted that the status quo order
passed by the apex court in the special leave petition pending
before it was acting as a hindrance and sought implementation
of the directions passed by the High Court.
During the earlier hearing, Swamy had clarified that he
was not raising the question of whether Ram temple be built at
the site or not but restricting his prayers to worship of Lord
Rama in the makeshift temple.
On January 29, he had submitted that irrespective of the
final outcome relating to the title deed dispute pending in
the Allahabad High Court, the authorities should ensure
adequate arrangements for devotees to have a `darshan` of the
idols. Denial of the same was violative of their fundamental
rights, he had said.
PTI
