On 8th August, the Shia Wakf Board had filed an affidavit in the Supreme Court regarding the Ram Mandir issue in Ayodhya. In that affidavit, the board sought that a Ram Temple be built at the Janmbhoomi area while a Mosque be built in a Muslim dominated area that is at a reasonable distance from Lord Ram’s birth place.
Via the affidavit, the Shia Wakf board also tried to stake claim over the disputed site where a makeshift temple exists today. The reports claimed that the Shia body had decided to challenge the 1946 court order, which had granted the ownership of that piece of land, where earlier Babri Masjid stood, to the Sunni Central Waqf Board. According to the Shia Waqf Board chief Waseem Rizvi, they had lost the case in 1945 due to the sloppy manner in which their then council had dealt with the manner.
The Shia Wakf board challenged the 71 year old order in the Supreme Court the following day. The board has claimed in their petition that the Babri Masjid was built on the disputed piece of land by destroying a temple which stood there — a fact that is denied by Sunni board and some leftist historians.
The board also put forth certain historical claims in order to back their claim over the Masjid. According to the board, the Masjid was largely constructed by Shia Muslims and thus should come under Shia Wakf properties. They also contested the claim that the Masjid was built by Mughal ruler Babar, and pointed out that it was actually constructed by one of his Shia ministers named Abdul Mir Baki, who financed it using his own money.
Babar, who was a Sunni Muslim, had merely ordered the construction of the Mosque and had left the spot after 5-6 days as the construction was going to take longer. The petition also claims that it was Baki who was responsible for scoping out the land and demolishing the temple so as to felicitate the construction of the Mosque.
The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear the Ram Mandir-Babri Masjid case on Friday. This hearing would come seven years after the Allahabad High Court ruling, which had said that Lord Ram was indeed born at the disputed site and that the Hindus had a right to worship there. The court would also rule as to whether Shia Wakf Board can also be admitted as one of the petitioners in the case.
