This Is Extraordinary And Has Never Happened Before: CJI On Allahabad High Court Judge Retaining File Of Gyanvapi Mosque Case, Dismisses Mosque Committee's SLP

The Supreme Court today upheld an order passed by the Bench of the Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court, which had directed the transfer of the Gyanvapi case concerning a dispute over the mosque from a single-judge to itself. Before the single-judge, the matter was pending for a long time and had been listed approximately 75 times.

The Bench consisting of Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud, Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra, found no merit in the Special Leave Petition filed by the Anjuman Intezamia Masajid Committee and dismissed the SLP. The CJI, while affirming the impugned order, questioned how a single-judge could conduct 75 hearings in a matter of this nature. "How come the High Court took 75 hearings in this small matter...Mr. Ahmadi... let this matter go before a different Judge", remarked the CJI.

Further, upon reviewing the impugned order, wherein it was stated that records of the cases were never sent to the parent section in the Registry of the High Court as per the applicable procedure, the CJI expressed apprehension and stated, "This is extraordinary. It has never happened before. It should go back to the registry and not remain in the chambers of the Judge. There are reasons cited by the Chief Justice, and we will leave it at that. I don't want to say much about it." The Court accordingly dismissed the SLP.

Senior Advocate Huzefa Ahmadi along with Advocate-on-Record Fuzail Ahmad Ayyubi appeared for the Masajid Committee while Senior Advocate CS Vaidyanathan appeared for the Respondents. 

Background: On the administrative side, the Bench of Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court withdrew the case concerning the Gyanvapi Mosque from the Single Bench of Justice Prakash Padia who had already heard the matter on approximately 75 occasions and had subsequently reserved the judgment on July 25, 2023. However, the High Court Chief Justice, on the administrative side, withdrew the case before the judgment pronouncement, stating that the Single Bench of Justice Padia did not have the jurisdiction to proceed with the hearing of cases and directed for re-hearing before a different Bench. 

The order passed on the administrative side came to be challenged before the Allahabad High Court in a Writ Petition filed by the Anjuman Intezamia Masajid Committee stating that the course adopted on the administrative side is against propriety and, therefore, liable to be withdrawn with further directions issued for the cases to be placed before the same bench which had concluded the hearing. 

Dismissing the Writ Petition, the Chief Justice observed that the case was listed before the same court even after the concerned Single Judge ceased to have jurisdiction in the matter as per roster.

The Chief Justice stated, "The report submitted by the registry states that the leading file along with connected matters were listed before the learned Single Judge on 09.08.2021 when a direction was issued to list the cases on 11.08.2021. On 11.08.2021 the matter was directed to be listed for further hearing on 17.08.2021. As per the roster notified on 22.11.2021 and subsequent rosters notified by the Chief Justice, from time to time (except last two rosters, i.e. w.e.f. 13.3.2023 and 3.7.2023), these cases could not have been listed before the learned Single Judge without obtaining appropriate nomination from the Chief Justice. The registry has further clarified that the records of these cases were never sent to the parent section in the registry for the procedures to be followed for listing of the cases in terms of the applicable orders, both on the administrative side and the judicial side."

Continuing, the Chief Justice in its order also observed, "The registry has further reported that all records of leading file alongwith connected cases remained in the chambers of the learned Judge and the cases were listed on the instructions of Bench Secretary and the officials attached to His Lordship’s chambers. As per the registry the parent section responsible for listing of the cases before the Court had no access to the records of the cases as the files were never sent to the registry."

Being aggrieved, the the Anjuman Intezamia Masajid Committee approached the Supreme Court in the SLP which was accordingly dismissed. 

Cause Title: Anjuman Intezamia Masazid Varanasi v. 1st Additional District Judge And Ors. [SLP(C) No. 23850-23851/2023]