New Delhi: On Monday, in a significant development in the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid case, the Nirmohi Akhara, which is one of the key petitioners of the case, approached the Supreme Court seeking changes in the apex court order that referred the matter to a group of mediators. The petitioner told the apex court that the mediation process “left a lot to be desired.”  The group expressed its objection over the fact that more than 25 parties were invited to the mediations sessions. It requested the court to allow only the claimants to the disputed land -   the Sunni Waqf Board and the Nirmohi Akhara – to be a part of the mediation process.

Here it is to be noted that the Waqf Board and the Akhara were the only two petitioners who had stated no objections to mediation. The other stakeholders, including the Uttar Pradesh government, had expressed reservations against the mediation process. Additionally, the Akhara has also urged the apex court to shift the venue of mediation to a neutral city. Currently, the venue for mediation is Faizabad, a town located near Ayodhya. They have also asked the court to appoint two more judges as part of the panel of mediators. The court had selected retired Supreme Court judge Ibrahim Kalifulla, spiritual guru Sri Sri Ravi Shankar and a senior advocate, Sriram Panchu as the members of the mediation panel.

also read Security forces arrest three Jaish-e-Mohammad terrorists in Jammu & Kashmir

However, earlier this month, the top court had referred the decades-old Ayodhya dispute case to the three-member panel of mediators. A five-judge constitution bench, led by Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi, had asked the panel to talk to all stake-holders and arrive at a solution regarding the Ram Mandir-Babri Masjid dispute in eight weeks’ time. The court had asked the process to remain confidential and had ordered the media not to report on it.

Meanwhile, the Hindu groups associated with the case had stated that a solution through mediation may not be acceptable for a majority of the community. However, the court had noted that it was not appropriate to pre-judge the matter. It had stressed that the case was about "mind, heart and healing" and not land.

also read Mother India is as much mine as it is Yogi Adityanath’s: Imran Masood