Yet another petition challenging the validity of the Places of Worship Act has been filed before the Supreme Court. Rudra Vikram Singh an Advocate from Varanasi and socio-political activist has now challenged the validity of Sections 2, 3, 4 and 6 of the Places of Worship Act through a petition filed before the Supreme Court.

The petition states that the said provisions of the Places of Worship Act are in violation of Articles 14, 15, 21, 25, 26 and 29 and that they also violate the principles of secularism and rule of law.

The petition states that, "Center has barred the remedies against illegal encroachment on the places of worship and pilgrimages and Hindus Jain Buddhist Sikhs cannot file suit or to approach appropriate forum or to respective high Courts. Hence they won't be able to restore their places of worship and pilgrimage including Temples, Endowments, mutts etc. from hoodlums and illegal barbaric acts of invaders will continue in perpetuity."

The Petitioner also submits that, "Section 2,3,4 of the said act not only offend right to pray practice prorogate religion (Article 25), right to manage maintain administer places of worship-pilgrimage (Article 26), right to conserve culture (Article 29) but also contrary to State's duty to protect historic places (Article 49) and preserve religious cultural heritage (Article 51A). Section 2,3,4 also offend basic dictum of Hindu law enshrined in Vedas, Purans, Ramayan, Geeta that Idol represents the Supreme Being and so its existence is never lost and deity cannot be divested from its property even by the Ruler or King. Therefore, Hindus have fundamental right under Article 25-26 to worship the deity at the place 'It' is, utilize deity's property for religious purposes."

The petition posed the following questions of law before the Supreme Court:

"1. Whether the Central Government has the power to close the doors of Courts?

2. Whether Central Government has the power to bar judicial remedy against illegal encroachment on the places of worship and pilgrimage?

3. Whether Central Government has transgressed its power by making provisions to bar judicial remedy available to aggrieved Hindus Jains Buddhists Sikhs against the wrong committed by invaders and law breakers?

4. Whether the Hindu law is the 'Law in force' within the meaning of Article 372(1) after commencement of the Constitution?

5. Whether Section 2, 3, 4 of the impugned Act is void under Article 13(2) and ultra vires to the Article 14, 15, 21, 25, 26 and 29?

6. Whether any rule regulation custom usage having the force of law, running counter to Articles 25-26 is void by virtue of Article 13(1)?

7. Whether illegal construction on religious places before 15.8.1947 has become void by virtue of injunction under Article 13(1)?

8. Whether exclusion of Lord Ram birthplace inclusion of Lord Krishna birthplace offends Article 14 as both are incarnation of Lord Vishnu?

9. Whether impugned Act violates the principle of secularism as same has been made to curb the right of Hindus Jains Buddhists Sikhs to restore their places of worship and pilgrimage through Court?

10. Whether barring citizens of the country to approach to the Courts for the redressal of their grievances whether it is related to customs, rituals etc. is against the Principle of Natural Justice"

The Petitioner has prayed that the Supreme Court may declare that Sections 2, 3 and 4 of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 are void and unconstitutional for being violative of Articles 14,15,21,25,26,29 of the Constitution, in so far as it seeks to validate 'places of worship', illegally made by barbaric invaders.

Yesterday, a petition was filed before the Supreme Court by Swami Jitendranand Saraswatee hallenges the constitutional validity of Sections 2,3 and 4 of the Places of Worship Act (Special Provisions) Act, 1991.

Places of Worship Act

Deepankar Malviya