Ayodhya land plea in SC a pre-election ploy

The Centre’s plea to the Supreme Court, filed on Tuesday, to return to the owners the undisputed land which surrounds the “disputed” territory in Ayodhya, where the demolished Babri Masjid once stood, is shot through with the motive of creating a favourable communal atmosphere before the Lok Sabha elections.

Following an order by the Supreme Court in 1993 — after the December 1992 demolition — the land surrounding the earlier mosque complex was acquired by the Centre. This was to ensure that in case the title suit for the disputed area went in favour of Muslim entities, there should be no hindrance created in their path to access the “disputed” area by the property owners of the surrounding areas.

The bulk of this extra land is owned by the Ram Janmabhoomi Nyas, an outfit created by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad. The court spelt out its judgment as many as three times since the demolition. The purpose was to ensure that a congenial atmosphere prevailed when the title suit was decided.

The Centre’s fresh move, apparently at the behest of the Hindutva outfits, runs counter to the spirit of the Supreme Court’s reiterated order. In case the temple construction is begun in the undisputed areas before the Lok Sabha polls, the chances are that the court’s ruling, should it be in favour of the Muslim parties, will be nullified in effect.

This gives the impression that the Centre is taking a partisan view of things, and is offering undue encouragement to one of the two parties to the Ayodhya title dispute, on which the Supreme Court is likely to begin hearings in the foreseeable future. In fact, this seems to be the government’s purpose.

Since the government has so far not been able to satisfy the Hindutva constituency over beginning construction of a Ram temple at the site where the mosque stood, it appears keen to create the optics of acting in favour of the RSS-related bodies as the elections approach.

The Centre appears to be hoping that such optics will create electoral sentiment in its favour even in the absence of favourable governance outcomes in the past five years.

Whether or not this calculation is realistic, the Supreme Court must not be hustled into wasting its time in disposing of the Centre’s appeal since it has already spoken on the substance of this plea three times in the past. The court is under no obligation to fall in line with political initiatives of the Hindutva lobbies.

It must be clearly understood that the acquisition of the undisputed land by the Centre, following an order of the court, was intrinsically linked to the disposal of the title suit of the “disputed” area.