Vajukhana ASI Study Demand Decision in Gyanvapi
Today is decision time in the Gyanvapi dispute in Varanasi. The FTC court will give its verdict shortly in the Varanasi district court on this matter that has been pending for 33 years. This decision will be taken in which it will be decided whether or not the survey of an additional part will be conducted at the Gyanvapi campus. Apart from this, it will also be decided how the expert committee will be constituted in case of a survey. Being a representative demand, this decision is being watched by millions of Hindus living in the country and abroad.
Originalism was introduced in the Gyanvapi case in the year 1991. However, now the hearing has taken place in the FTC (Higher Division) Court, Varanasi. On October 19, the court had reserved its decision on the Shambhu couple. In this decision, the court will give its verdict on whether or not an ASI study will be carried out in the remaining parts of the Gyanvapi complex. If permission is granted, it must also be decided whether permission will be granted to dig a four-by-four-foot trench under the main dome or not.
Vadamitra Vijay Shankar Rastogi Application
The decision will be taken on the application of litigant friend Vijay Shankar Rastogi for compliance of the decision of April 8, 2021. Litigant friend Vijay Shankar Rastogi asked in his application what is the relationship of plot number 9130 with plot number 9131 and 9132. Since your response will be available only after the ASI survey. For this reason, he has demanded a study of the entire campus. Similarly, in case number 18/2022 Rakhi Singh, the court asked to include the ASI survey report in this case as well.
The Muslim side continually protests
It has also been said that it is necessary to carry out a study of the remaining space and sealed toilets. Only then will the situation of the entire complex become clear. The Muslim side has opposed further studies and digging trenches in the courtyard from the beginning. The Muslim side says this is a way to prolong the matter. Anything that is requested from the court in the name of permission is impractical. The Supreme Court has banned sealed toilets. While permission cannot be given to excavate. Because it may cause damage to the mosque.
