A hearing was held in the Supreme Court today in the recent bulldozer action case on alleged illegal construction near Somnath Temple in Gujarat. The Supreme Court dismissed the petition of the Muslim side demanding permission to celebrate the Urs (URS) annually at the removed dargah. Along with this, a petition seeking contempt action against the collector and other officials of Gir Somnath also dismissed.
In this petition, the Muslim side had sought permission to celebrate annual Urs from 1 to 3 February in the dargah near Gir Somnath. The lawyer of the Muslim side told the court that Urs has been used here for years but the administration refused to allow yesterday. The administration says that there is no dargah there. The lawyer said that the record mentions up to 1960. There has been permission with some conditions. This furs that lasts for three days happens every year.
What is the side of Gujarat government
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who appeared on behalf of the Gujarat government, said that this land has been handed over to Sardar Patel Trust in the year 1951. He said that the illegal construction of all religions present in that area was broken. They also included temples. He said that the main case is still going on in the High Court. Along with this, ASI also said in the Supreme Court that there is no protected structure here.
Permission sought to celebrate Urs
Actually, the Muslim side had said that the administration sought permission to celebrate Urs, but the administration is not giving any answer. During the last hearing in the matter of demolition of illegal construction, the Supreme Court issued a notice to the Gujarat government and ordered to upheld the situation. After which Patni Muslim Jamaat filed a contempt petition in the Supreme Court demanding contempt action against the Collector and other officials of Gir Somnath.
Muslim side arguments in SC
The petition cited the alleged illegal demolition of several other structure located in Dargah Mangroli Shah Baba, Idgah, Prabhas Patan, Verwal, Gir Somnath. The contempt petition stated that despite the Supreme Court’s order banning action, there was a large vandalism.