In its proposal for an out-of-court settlement of the vexed Ayodhya dispute, UP Shia Central Waqf Board on Monday suggested that a Ram temple be constructed at Ayodhya while a Masjid-e-Aman be constructed at Hussainabad, Lucknow.
A draft proposal which was submitted in the Supreme Court on November 18 has been endorsed by several Hindu religious leaders connected to the Ayodhya dispute. The endorsement of Sunni Central Waqf Board, the only Muslim contestant in the dispute, was, however, missing.
The five-point proposal includes the construction of Masjid-e-Aman in Lucknow in place of demolished Babri mosque. The proposal, a four-page document, says that there was no need for any new mosque in Ayodhya.
The proposal has found support from Hindu saints Mahant Dharam Das — one of the stakeholders in the title suit — Mahant Ram Das of Nirmohi Akhara, Mahant Suresh Das of Digambar Akhara and VHP leader and former MP Ramvilas Das Vedanti, along with Akhara Parishad chairman Narendra Giri.
The other points include the withdrawal of claim by Shia Waqf Board on Babri mosque and that the new mosque not be named after an invader like Babar and instead be named Masjid-e-Aman.
For the proposed new mosque, the Board has already sent a proposal to the UP Government seeking allotment of nazul land in the Old City area of Lucknow.
Chairman of Shia Waqf Board Waseem Rizvi flanked by Akhara Parishad chairman Mahant Giri said a press conference in Lucknow on Monday that the new mosque would be constructed in Husdainabad area of Lucknow.
“Ayodhya is a place of temples and there is no need of a mosque. The new Masjid-e-Aman in Lucknow could be built on Government land in Hussainabad area in front of Clock Tower. We will ask the Government to give us one acre of land for the new mosque and it will be constructed by funds collected from the people,” Rizvi said.
Waseem Rizvi demanded a high-level probe into irregularities by UP Sunni Central Waqf Board in rejecting the claim of Shias on Babri mosque, which was originally a Shia Waqf property.
Rizvi claimed that the registration of Babri mosque as property of Sunni Central Waqf Board was rejected in 1944 by a competent court and hence Sunni Waqf Board could not be a party in the Ayodhya dispute. He clarified that an Allahabad High Court judgment on September 30, 2010 mentioned only about Muslim sides without specifying any Muslim sect or organisation.
Rizvi said that the now the ball is in the SC’s court and it would have to decide on the formula submitted by Shia Waqf Board. The Supreme Court is likely to commence a day-to-day hearing in the case from December 5.