Maharaja Kumari Krishna Priya, the daughter of the current titular head of the erstwhile Royal Family of Kashi has filed an Intervention Application in the plea challenging the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991.
Another person from Tamil Nadu named Santosh Tamilarasan, a member of Tuluva Vellalar community, which rebuilt the present Kapaleeshwara Temple in Mylapore, Chennai after its destruction by the Portugese, has also joined Kumari Krishna Priya in challenging the Act. The St. Thomas Basilica stands at the original site of the temple.
In the application, Kumari Krishna Priya has submitted that as traditional guardians of the Kashi Vishwanath Temple, she has the right and duty to reclaim the original site of the temple atop which the disputed structure of Razia Mosque stands.
She along with a G. Aravindalochanan also sought the reclamation of the Bindhu Madhav Mandir at Panchganga Ghat in Varanasi which was razed down by Mughal tyrant Aurangzeb who later built the now disputed illegal structure of Dhaurahra Mosque.
The intervention application noted that all the three applicants have the locus standi to challenge the vires of the Act on grounds of violation of Articles 25, 26, 29 and 32 of the Constitution.
The application stated that the “Impugned Act is a textbook instance of a legislation that was passed in the most undemocratic of manners possible, without any regard for the fundamental rights of affected parties, in particular the right of formerly colonised indigenous communities to seek reclamation of occupied religious cum civilisational sites.”
“Quite apart from the problems associated with the process itself, it is humbly submitted that the direct consequence of the process as well as the end result is the unconstitutional truncation of the rights of affected indigenous communities to knock the doors of Courts of this country to seek enforcement of their fundamental rights and restoration of occupied sites to the original owners/stakeholders/guardians.” the application noted.
The applicants contend that the “impact and import of the impugned Act must be viewed and understood against the backdrop of Bharat’s history which has witnessed two successive waves of settler colonisation, Middle Eastern followed by European, that directly resulted in incalculable destruction of its religion, culture, heritage, knowledge production and dissemination structures, and economy, among other things.”
“While, on the face of it, it could be argued that the Act is applicable “equally” to all communities, the fact is that its intended impact are the rights of Bharatiya faith systems which are prevented from reclaiming the objects of their faith, their Kshetra and Deities. In other words, the Act is a textbook example of oikophobia/oikomisia and misautogeny i.e., hatred or contempt for one’s own people and culture”, the application submitted.
The intervention application on behalf of the petitioners has been filed by Supreme Court Advocate J. Sai Deepak.
Several pleas have been filed against the Places of Worship Act challenging its constitutional validity by Advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay (Main petitioner), Advocate Chandra Shekhar, former Member of Parliament Chintamani Malviya, Swami Jeetendra Saraswatee, Devkinandan Thakurji, Anil Kabootra.
The All India Muslim Personal Law Board has moved an application in the same opposing the challenge.
Click here to subscribe to The Commune on Telegram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.