The Supreme Court began the hearing on a batch of 13 petitions challenging 2010 Allahabad High Court verdict that had divided the disputed Babri Masjid-Ramjanambhoomi site between the Nirmohi Akhara, Lord Ram deity and the Sunni Waqf Board.

The matter came up before the bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra, Justice Ashok Bhushan and Justice S Abdul Nazeer.

According to media reports, the court was earlier expected to hold day-to-day hearing, but given that CJI Misra is already part of the Constitution Bench hearing the challenge against the Aadhaar law, the day-today hearing may not be immediately possible.

The petitions before the judges relate to the 2010 Allahabad High Court’s verdict. The high court in its verdict had allotted two-thirds of the land to Hindus. The court had added that they (Hindus) could keep a makeshift temple built over the razed mosque’s central dome.

in the title suit that had been pending for nearly six decades. The dispute before the court was whether the 2.7 acres of disputed land on which the Babri Masjid stood before it was demolished on December 6, 1992, belongs to the Sunni Central Waqf Board or to the Akhil Bharat Hindu Mahasabha.

On 5 December last year, the bench had directed the listing of the matter on February 8 after senior lawyers Kapil Sibal, Rajeev Dhavan and Dushyant Dave, appearing for some of the petitioners, had pressed for postponing of the hearing postponed citing its repercussions for the country’s polity.

Sibal, who had appeared for UP Sunni Central Waqf Board, had told the three judge bench that it should not “hear the matter which has repercussions on the polity of the country”.  He had urged the court to have the hearing in July 2019, apparently suggesting that the outcome of the hearing by the top court would have a bearing on 2019 general elections.

However, senior counsel Harish Salve, who appeared on the other side, had said that as far as the court was concerned it was “just a case” and the repercussion of the outcome of the case was none of its outlook.

After the court rejected the submission for postponing the hearing till 2019, including hearing of the matter by a constitution bench, it, on December 5 asked senior counsel C.S. Vaidyanathan, appeared for deity, to commence his case.

(With IANS inputs)