NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday told the Gujarat government not to create any third party rights on lands around Gir Somnath which were got vacated after carrying out massive demolition drives.
Land Possession to Remain with Government Until Further Orders
A bench of Justices B R Gavai and K V Viswanathan refused to order status quo but the court recorded a statement from Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Gujarat government, that until further orders the possession of land shall remain with the government and shall not be allotted to any third party.
Demolition Drives Spark Dispute Over Waqf Land and Religious Structures
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for a Muslim party Auliya-e-Deen Committee, said the properties were on the Waqf land and the state government should be directed not to create any third-party rights.
Appearing for the Gujarat government, Mehta said that there was nothing in the name of the petitioner Auliya-E-Deen Committee and asserted that the land in contention is government land.
The court was taking up the contempt petition against the Gujarat government authorities for allegedly demolishing residential and religious structures in the state despite an interim stay and without its prior nod.
Sibal said their argument is that this is government land and I can demolish the structures anytime I want. “Till next date, let the possession be only with the government,” the bench said.
Mehta agreed with the court’s suggestion and contended that he will make a statement regarding it. Sibal said let there be an order of the court.
“Solicitor General states that until further orders the possession of land shall remain with the government and shall not be allotted to any third party…..we don't find it necessary to pass any interim order,” the bench said, in its order.
The bench suggested that it will direct the Gujarat High Court to decide the matter within one month and till that this order will continue. The court also made it clear that the pendency of this petition before it will not bar the high court from proceeding with the matter.
Sibal, on his part, claimed that there were temples situated on the government land, but they were not demolished but action was taken against only Muslim places of worship.
He also contended that heritage monuments, ancient dargahs and graveyards were subjected to demolitions.
Mehta said that only the structures which were encroaching on public lands were demolished.
He claimed that the petitioner was suppressing material information from the court.
Sibal insisted on granting a status quo order, however the bench was not keen. At this stage, the bench said, "We can order restoration also".
Senior advocate Huzefa Ahmadi, representing another petitioner, contended that in 1903 the land was allotted to his client and there were documents to establish that.
In an affidavit, the Gujarat government had earlier justified its decision in connection with the demolition of a dargah and other places in Gir Somnath by authorities, as those were erected by encroachments on government lands abutting the Arabian sea, a water body.
