NEW DELHI: Giving another chance for mediation, the Supreme Court Friday ordered setting up of a three-member panel headed by a former apex court judge F M I Kalifulla to explore a possible settlement of the decades-old politically sensitive Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid land dispute in Ayodhya.
Spiritual guru and founder of Art of Living foundation Sri Sri Ravi Shankar and senior advocate Sriram Panchu, well known for his mediation experience, will be the other two members of the panel.
Interestingly, all the three mediators have a common thread – all hail from Tamil Nadu. Kalifulla hails from Karaikudi in Sivaganga district while Ravi Shankar was born in Papanasam near Kumbakonam in Thanjavur district and Panchu is Chennai-based.
The mediation process in Faizabad of Uttar Pradesh, around 7 km from the twin city of Ayodhya, will commence within a week and the panel will submit a progress report within four weeks, the top court said in its order that came ahead of the upcoming Lok Sabha polls.
It said the mediation proceeding to be held “in-camera” and in “utmost confidentiality” will be completed within eight weeks which is the interregnum period granted earlier by the apex court to the parties in the main Ayodhya case to go through translations of oral and documentary evidences.
A five-judge Constitution Bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi said it does not find any “legal impediment” to make a reference to mediation for a possible settlement of the dispute.
“We, therefore, order accordingly, and having taken note of the names suggested by the parties, we are of the view that the following panel of mediators should be appointed to go into the dispute with liberty to the mediators to co-opt other members of the panel, if so required,” it said.
Declaring the names, the bench said: “Justice (retd) Fakkir Mohamed Ibrahim Kalifulla – chairman, Sri Sri Ravi Shankar – member, senior advocate Sriram Panchu – member.”
The bench, also comprising Justices S A Bobde, D Y Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan and S Abdul Nazeer, was told earlier by Hindu bodies, except for Nirmohi Akhara, and Uttar Pradesh government, that they oppose the court’s suggestion for mediation. The Muslim bodies supported the proposal. However, both sides suggested the panel of names for possible mediators.
The three panel members separately said they will strive to achieve a resolution of the vexed dispute.
A number of senior BJP leaders made it clear that building Ram temple at the disputed site in Ayodhya is the only way out of the impasse. Union minister Uma Bharti said one has to respect the court order but asserted that she stands for building the Ram temple at the disputed site in Ayodhya and a mosque can be built only outside its vicinity. BJP general secretary P Muralidhar Rao said keeping the dispute pending for long is not in anyone’s interest.
The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) welcomed the court order, saying it would be most befitting that the matter is resolved through negotiations.
While BSP leader Mayawati called the move “appreciable,” AIMIM chief Asaduddin Owaisi said Ravi Shankar should act in an “unbiased” manner.
The Congress said it respects the court decision and noted that the court’s verdict should be final and binding on all parties.
CPI(M) leader Brinda Karat said the previous mediation efforts had failed to yield results but this time, the Supreme Court is monitoring it and all the parties that have gone to the court are in agreement with the decision and it is to be seen what will be the result.
While opposing the suggestion of mediation, Hindu bodies have argued that earlier attempts of reaching a compromise have failed and provisions of Civil Procedure Code (CPC) require public notice to be issued before the start of mediation process.
“Considering the provisions of the CPC…, we do not find any legal impediment in making a reference to mediation for a possible settlement of the dispute(s) arising out of the appeals. Whether the said provisions of the CPC would apply in the event parties arrive at a settlement/compromise in the mediation proceedings is a matter left open to be decided at the appropriate stage,” the bench said.
The top court directed that the mediation proceedings be conducted with “utmost confidentiality” for ensuring its success and the views expressed by any of the parties including the mediators should be kept confidential and not be revealed to any other person. “We are of the further opinion that while the mediation proceedings are being carried out, there ought not to be any reporting of the said proceedings either in the print or in the electronic media,” the bench said.
However, it refrained from passing any specific restrain order at this stage and instead empowered the mediators to pass necessary orders in writing, if so required, to restrain publication of the details of the mediation proceedings.
“The chairman of the mediation panel may also inform the registry of this court any difficulties that the panel may face in carrying out the task assigned to it by the present order and also to inform of any requirement to facilitate the mediation and to conclude the same at the earliest.”
Fixing the seat for mediation process in Faizabad, the court said adequate arrangements including the venue of the mediation, place of stay of the mediators, their security, travel should be forthwith arranged by the state government so that proceedings could commence immediately.
Fourteen appeals have been filed in the apex court against the 2010 Allahabad High Court judgment, delivered in four civil suits, that the 2.77-acre land in Ayodhya be partitioned equally among the three parties – the Sunni Waqf Board, the Nirmohi Akhara and Ram Lalla.
On December 6, 1992, the Babri Masjid, constructed at the disputed site in the 16th century by Shia Muslim Mir Baqi, was demolished triggering communal riots across the country in which nearly 2,000 people were killed.