Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, Vishwa Hindu Parishad and other right-wing bodies seem to be in no mood to leave any stone unturned as they plan to organize a mega Ram Mandir rally on 9th December. The rally will be organized at Ramleela Maidan in New Delhi. As per sources approximately 8 lakh people are expected to take part in the rally.
#BREAKING – @RSSorg, VHP and other right-wing bodies plan mega #RamMandir rally at Ramleela Maidan in Delhi on December 9. Close to 8 lakh people expected to attend the rally. #RamMandir #AyodhyaDdelay | @payalmehta100 with more details pic.twitter.com/fzy5imGdqj
— News18 (@CNNnews18) November 13, 2018
The decision comes up after Supreme Court further delayed the hearing dates to January 2019. The rally is being organized around the time when Parliament commences its winter session, which technically happens to be the final session before going into 2019 general elections, the budget session being just a formality.
The reason for conducting such a mega rally is the fact that these organizations want to have a solution based on consensus, rather than putting pressure on the ruling dispensation as they only expect parliamentarians to come up with a clear concise on the issue or bring an ordinance on the same. On the other hand, the apex court has made it clear that they don’t want to push for an ‘early hearing’ as far as this case is concerned.
This year on September 27, Supreme Court declined to refer the case to a five-judge Constitution bench and with a majority of 2:1 constituted newly three-judge bench for the case to be heard on October 29, 2018.
Ignoring the Uttar Pradesh government’s request of early hearing, the Supreme Court on October 29, 2018 adjourned the hearing for the Ayodhya title suit case to January. The bench of Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice KM Joseph was hearing a batch of petitions challenging the 2010 Allahabad High Court verdict trifurcating the disputed site at Ayodhya into three parts for Ram Lalla, Nirmohi Akhara and the original Muslim litigant.
CJI Ranjan Gogoi rejected the early hearing by saying that “the court has its own priorities.” Uttar Pradesh Solicitor-General, Tushar Mehta had urged a hearing in November because of the nature of the dispute.
The bench said the appropriate bench will decide the future course of hearing in January next year. “We will fix the date of hearing of Ayodhya dispute case before the appropriate bench in January,” CJI Gogoi added.
Furthermore, Nearly 50 per cent of the temple carving work at the Ram Janmabhomi Nyas-run workshop in Ayodhya’s Karsevakpuram has been completed despite the delay in Supreme Court’s verdict. Annu Bhai Sompura, in-charge At Karsevakpuram’s sprawling karyashala (workshop) said, “fifty per cent of carving work of stones has been completed, which means the first floor is ready”.
In the RSS’s three-day Akhil Bharatiya Karyakari Mandal meet that got concluded on November 2nd, 2018, Sarkaryawah Suresh ‘Bhaiyaji’ Joshi while addressing a press conference after the meeting said, “Ram Mandir in Ayodhya is connected with the sentiments of crores of Hindus. The Supreme Court should realize this and expedite the proceedings of the matter.”
Adding to it he said, “The Hindu society has been running a movement since last 30 years on the issue of Ram Mandir. The society expects that a grand Ram Mandir should be built and all hurdles associated with it should be removed”. When the court was asked when the hearing would take place, they said that they have other priorities. It is their right to decide when to hear a case, but the court’s reply has left the Hindu society feeling humiliated and pained. The Supreme Court should rethink on this matter. The society should respect the court and the court should also respect the society and its sentiments.”
Furthermore he said, “It is for the government to decide when it wants to enact a law or promulgate an ordinance on the issue of Ram Mandir. Now, when it has been established in the court, on the basis of evidence provided by the archaeological department, that a temple existed there, no one should have an objection to the construction of a temple there.”
Concluding his statement he said, “We are not putting any pressure on the government in connection with the Ram Mandir. On the contrary, we are talking about finding a solution based on consensus. The honorable saints should be consulted and a solution should be found. Any government runs on a balance between consensus and law. The government did not construct the temple in spite of having majority – this shows its faith in the court. The court too should understand the sensitivities of the issue and think on it.”
