The Supreme Court on Monday granted the Union government further time once again to file a reply on plea challenging validity of 1991 law which mandated that the character of all religious places in the country must be maintained as prevailed on August 15, 1947.
Taking up the matter for the first time, a bench of Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and J B Pardiwala allowed a plea by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta for more time to file an affidavit.
Mehta said the matter was being deliberated at the highest level and it required further time for the purpose.
The Centre's reply in the matter is awaited since March, 2021.
On Mehta's request, the court said the reply should be filed on or before December 12.
Explained | What is the Places of Worship Act, 1991?
Mehta had earlier too sought time before a bench led by the then CJI U U Lalit to file a reply on behalf of the Centre to the contentious issue.
On October 12, Mehta had claimed before court that the 2019 Ayodhya case judgement by a five-judge Constitution bench does not cover the questions related to validity of the Protection of Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991.
Senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, appearing of petitioner Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay had then said the 1991 Act was passed without much of debate or discussions in Parliament and issues involved here related to questions of vital national importance and must be adjudicated by the top court.
Senior advocate Raju Ramachandran and advocate Vrinda Grover, appearing on behalf of the Muslim sides, including NGO Jamiat Ulama-I-Hind and All India Muslim Personal Law Board, submitted that their stand to the petitions would depend upon the reply filed by the Union government.
BJP leader Subramanian Swamy, who also filed his own separate plea, contended once again that temples of Varanasi's Kashi Vishwanath and Mathura's Lord Krishna birth place can be included to the law which kept the Ayodhya dispute outside its purview.
The court posted the matter for hearing in first week of January.