<p>The dispute over the ownership of the Idgah Maidan in Chamarajpet dates back to the 1950s when Rukn-ul-Mulk S Abdul Wajid, representing the city’s Muslim community, filed a suit for confirmation of the possession of the land. </p>.<p>The suit was dismissed by the Second Munsiff, Bangalore, but on appeal, the Civil Judge, Bangalore, reversed the decision and decreed the suit. The Corporation of the City of Bangalore went in for an appeal in the High Court of Mysore on March 20, 1959, but didn’t get any relief. The civic body eventually went to the Supreme Court, which summarily dismissed the civil appeal with costs on January 27, 1964. </p>.<p>The land in survey number 40, Chamarajpet Extension, was previously much bigger — 10 acres and five guntas. It contained the Idgah as well as a Muslim burial ground. The plot was later cut down to two acres and 10 guntas as the burial ground was shifted some distance away (across Mysuru Road). </p>.<p>The Supreme Court noted that Wajid appeared to have filed the suit “because the corporation began to dig foundations for an additional building in survey number 40”. Muslims argued that “from time immemorial, the community was in “uninterrupted possession” of survey number 40”. </p>.<p>The court trashed the corporation’s claim that prayers used to take place only on the platform (Minbar) and not on the outer ground beyond it. It also didn’t find merit in the civic body’s claim of possession of the ground because there are a footpath, public tap, municipal tank and children’s playground. </p>.<p>The two-judge bench noted that the corporation had filed “no map, document or record” and instead asked Muslims to produce deeds in their possession. Observing that the Idgah and the graveyard have existed for a very long time (the Idgah was mentioned in the document of 1938 and the graveyard in documents from 1871), the judges stated the high court was justified in summarily dismissing the corporation’s appeal. </p>.<p>Curiously, in February 2019, the BBMP’s Chamarajpet division issued a khata certificate for 941 square feet of land where the Minbar is located in favour of ‘Muslim Durga(h)’, without making any individual or entity a party. </p>.<p>Over the years, the Karnataka State Board of Wakfs notified the Idgah as a gazetted wakf property maintained by the Central Muslim Association (CMA). Asked whether the Supreme Court’s 1964 judgement was challenged or reversed, the board’s CEO, Khan Parvez, replied in the negative. </p>.<p>Given the facts of the case, the BBMP’s stand appears puzzling. No official was willing to speak on the matter.</p>.<p>Notwithstanding the land’s gazetted wakf property status, the CMA neither regulates nor controls it. The place is unfenced, and municipal workers sweep it. There are no security guards. </p>.<p>The CMA plans to call on the BBMP authorities on Wednesday and submit documents supporting its claims, its general secretary Dr Zahiruddin Ahmed said. </p>.<p>According to Dr Ahmed, the CMA does not assert its authority over the ground because it fears that would disturb the peace. The association just wants the status quo. </p>
<p>The dispute over the ownership of the Idgah Maidan in Chamarajpet dates back to the 1950s when Rukn-ul-Mulk S Abdul Wajid, representing the city’s Muslim community, filed a suit for confirmation of the possession of the land. </p>.<p>The suit was dismissed by the Second Munsiff, Bangalore, but on appeal, the Civil Judge, Bangalore, reversed the decision and decreed the suit. The Corporation of the City of Bangalore went in for an appeal in the High Court of Mysore on March 20, 1959, but didn’t get any relief. The civic body eventually went to the Supreme Court, which summarily dismissed the civil appeal with costs on January 27, 1964. </p>.<p>The land in survey number 40, Chamarajpet Extension, was previously much bigger — 10 acres and five guntas. It contained the Idgah as well as a Muslim burial ground. The plot was later cut down to two acres and 10 guntas as the burial ground was shifted some distance away (across Mysuru Road). </p>.<p>The Supreme Court noted that Wajid appeared to have filed the suit “because the corporation began to dig foundations for an additional building in survey number 40”. Muslims argued that “from time immemorial, the community was in “uninterrupted possession” of survey number 40”. </p>.<p>The court trashed the corporation’s claim that prayers used to take place only on the platform (Minbar) and not on the outer ground beyond it. It also didn’t find merit in the civic body’s claim of possession of the ground because there are a footpath, public tap, municipal tank and children’s playground. </p>.<p>The two-judge bench noted that the corporation had filed “no map, document or record” and instead asked Muslims to produce deeds in their possession. Observing that the Idgah and the graveyard have existed for a very long time (the Idgah was mentioned in the document of 1938 and the graveyard in documents from 1871), the judges stated the high court was justified in summarily dismissing the corporation’s appeal. </p>.<p>Curiously, in February 2019, the BBMP’s Chamarajpet division issued a khata certificate for 941 square feet of land where the Minbar is located in favour of ‘Muslim Durga(h)’, without making any individual or entity a party. </p>.<p>Over the years, the Karnataka State Board of Wakfs notified the Idgah as a gazetted wakf property maintained by the Central Muslim Association (CMA). Asked whether the Supreme Court’s 1964 judgement was challenged or reversed, the board’s CEO, Khan Parvez, replied in the negative. </p>.<p>Given the facts of the case, the BBMP’s stand appears puzzling. No official was willing to speak on the matter.</p>.<p>Notwithstanding the land’s gazetted wakf property status, the CMA neither regulates nor controls it. The place is unfenced, and municipal workers sweep it. There are no security guards. </p>.<p>The CMA plans to call on the BBMP authorities on Wednesday and submit documents supporting its claims, its general secretary Dr Zahiruddin Ahmed said. </p>.<p>According to Dr Ahmed, the CMA does not assert its authority over the ground because it fears that would disturb the peace. The association just wants the status quo. </p>