Ayodhya case: SC to fix hearing date on January 10
TIMESOFINDIA.COM | Updated: Jan 4, 2019, 11:40 ISTHighlights
- Since the CJI was heading a two-judge bench, the case was posted before a three-judge bench on January 10 for fixing schedule of hearing the case
- A bench led by CJI Ranjan Gogoi made it a 15-second affair by reading out the order — "further orders will be passed by appropriate bench on January 10"

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday said that an appropriate bench constituted by it will pass an order on January 10 for fixing the date of hearing in the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid land dispute title case at
Ayodhya.
Though the court number 1 was jam packed with lawyers and journalists in anticipation of some orders for day-to-day hearing of Ayodhya dispute, a bench led by CJI Ranjan Gogoi made it a 15-second affair by reading out the order - "further orders will be passed by appropriate bench on January 10".
Senior advocates Harish Salve and Rajeev Dhavan, appearing for different parties, did not even get the opportunity to make any submission.
Supreme Court also dismissed a PIL seeking to hear the Ayodhya matter on urgent and day to day basis. The PIL was filed by an advocate Harinath Ram in November 2018. Ram had urged the top court to hear the matter on an urgent basis and in a time-bound manner.
On December 24, a Supreme Court bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi had decided on "fixing the date of hearing before the appropriate bench." On the same day, Union minister Prakash Javadekar said that the central government wants the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title suit to be heard on day to day basis in the court.
On November 12, the Supreme Court had rejected a plea seeking an early hearing in the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title suit.
SC had last year rejected a plea by Muslim parties to refer Ayodhya land dispute to a five-judge constitution bench and had fixed hearing to commence from October 29.
However, on Oct 29, the SC had posted the matter for "appropriate orders" on January 4.
In 2010, the Allahabad High Court had divided the disputed land in Ayodhya into three parts for each of the parties — the Sunni Waqf Board, the Nirmohi Akhara and Ram Lalla.
Though the court number 1 was jam packed with lawyers and journalists in anticipation of some orders for day-to-day hearing of Ayodhya dispute, a bench led by CJI Ranjan Gogoi made it a 15-second affair by reading out the order - "further orders will be passed by appropriate bench on January 10".
Senior advocates Harish Salve and Rajeev Dhavan, appearing for different parties, did not even get the opportunity to make any submission.
Supreme Court also dismissed a PIL seeking to hear the Ayodhya matter on urgent and day to day basis. The PIL was filed by an advocate Harinath Ram in November 2018. Ram had urged the top court to hear the matter on an urgent basis and in a time-bound manner.
On December 24, a Supreme Court bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi had decided on "fixing the date of hearing before the appropriate bench." On the same day, Union minister Prakash Javadekar said that the central government wants the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title suit to be heard on day to day basis in the court.
On November 12, the Supreme Court had rejected a plea seeking an early hearing in the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title suit.
SC had last year rejected a plea by Muslim parties to refer Ayodhya land dispute to a five-judge constitution bench and had fixed hearing to commence from October 29.
However, on Oct 29, the SC had posted the matter for "appropriate orders" on January 4.
In 2010, the Allahabad High Court had divided the disputed land in Ayodhya into three parts for each of the parties — the Sunni Waqf Board, the Nirmohi Akhara and Ram Lalla.
Download The Times of India News App for Latest India News.
All Comments ()+^ Back to Top
Refrain from posting comments that are obscene, defamatory or inflammatory, and do not indulge in personal attacks, name calling or inciting hatred against any community. Help us delete comments that do not follow these guidelines by marking them offensive. Let's work together to keep the conversation civil.
HIDE