Court to hear suit on 'urs' at 3 Gyanvapi mazars on January 25

VARANASI: The fast-track court of civil judge (senior division) Mahendra Kumar Pandey on Tuesday sought reply from 10 Hindu organisations and individuals, who are demanding to be made a party in the suit filed by Mukhtar Ansari of Lohta area that seeks the right to hold urs, offer chadar and fatiha at mazars located on the Gyanvapi mosque compound, to explain as to why they should be made a party.
In another suit filed by environmentalist Prabhu Narain to seek regular worship of Lord Aadi Visheshwar, Shringar Gauri, Lord Ganesh, Lord Hanuman and other deities in Gyanvapi compound, removal of upper construction erected illegally over the temple and restoration of the heritage of the temple, the plaintiff filed objection against demand of Anjuman Intezamia Masajid, the Gyanvapi mosque management committee, of providing evidence in support of claims made in the suit.
Additional district government counsel (civil) Sulabh Prakash said that FTC fixed January 25 as the next date for hearing in Ansari's suit. Further hearing in suit filed by Prabhu Narain will take place on February 14, he added. Prakash said that as many as 10 applications were submitted by Hindu individuals or organisations under Order 1 Rule 10 of Code of Civil Procedure to become a party in this case. "On Tuesday, the court started hearing on these applications but Ansari filed an objection claiming that he had sought relief from the state and not from others. After it, the court asked the applicants to explain as to why they would be allowed to become party in this case," he added.
A group of Muslims led by Ansari had filed a petition before the court of district judge on July 26, 2022, demanding rights to offer chadar and fatiha at three mazars located behind the Gyanvapi mosque and also holding urs there. The district judge on July 27, 2022, initially transferred the case to the court of civil judge (senior division). Later, the FTC started hearing this case.
When FTC was hearing environmentalist Prabhu Narain's suit, his advocates including Anupam Dwivedi filed strong objection over the AIM's demand of seeking evidence in support of facts mentioned from Rigveda, Vedant, Aurangzeb Farman, Masir-e-Alamgir, history of Benaras. He said that all papers and documents referring to facts from Rigveda, Vedant, Aurangzeb Farman, Masir-e-Alamgir, history of Benaras are not private but they are available in books and public domain.