1. A fortnight earlier, a Division Bench of this Court vide judgment and order dated 2012.2019 has dismissed a writ petition wherein a Mandamus was sought against the Government of India and the State Government to permit the Muslims to offer ‘Namaz’ at the disputed land known as Ram Janmbhoomi-Babri Masjid as the Hindus were permitted to perform religious activities in the area. Now the instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner mainly with the prayer that respondents to the writ petition be commanded to permit the petitioner and other members of the Brahmin Sansad to carry out religious activity in nine old/ancient temples housing the idols of various Gods and Goddesses situated on the undisputed acquired land adjacent to the Ram Janam Bhoomi Complex.

2. According to the learned Counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is a social activist and is a Chairman of Brahmin Sansad, an Apex body created by a Trust Deed for espousing the cause of the Brahmins. Later on, the Organization started striving for construction of Lord Ram Temple by initiating the process of reconciliation between the parties and with the objective in sight, the petitioner had organized Parikarma at Ram Janm Bhumi. It is said that the petitioner has also been appointed as General Secretary of the Ram Janam Bhumi Parikarma Mahasimiti and thereafter he is making constant endeavour for initiation of religious activity in the old Hindu Temples.

3. Smt. Nalini Jain, learned Counsel for the petitioner has urged that the issue relating to the disputed land as well as the undisputed land is sub-judice before the Apex Court but on the basis of judicial and administrative orders, the propitiation of the idol of Ramlala is being done daily at regular intervals but paradoxically on the undisputed land housing the temples of various deities the government machinery is totally amnesic to the fact that religious activist is also required to be carried out in the said temples and denial of the same would incur the wrath of these Gods and Goddesses which is not a good omen for the growth of the country and the State.

4. It has also been stated that though a rightist Hindu Party is at the helm of affairs, both at the Centre and the State but still they are turning a blind eye to the initiation of religious activity in 16 ancient temples situated on the acquired but undisputed land as since last 25 years, the deities in the said temples are snoozing due to lack of any religious activity.

5. According to the learned Counsel, petitioner has made various representations to the concerned authorities including the President of India and the Prime Minister. It is said that the Prime Minister has forwarded the matter to the Ministry of Home Affairs for necessary action but till date, no positive steps have been taken.

6. Rebutting the assertions of the petitioner, Sri S.B. Pandey, Assistant Solicitor General of India has submitted that the relief as sought for by the petitioner cannot be granted in view of the various orders passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in various Civil Appeals, leading of which is Civil Appeal No. 10866-10867 of 2010; M.Siddiq @ H.M. Siddiq, Jamiat Ulama-I-Hind.

7. Learned Assistant Solicitor General of India has also invited our attention towards the Acquisition of Certain Area at Ayodhya Act, 1993 and said that the Acquisition Act was enacted with the sole object to 3 maintain public order and to promote communal harmony and spirit of common brotherhood amongst the people of India and as such none can be allowed to disturb the communal harmony.

8. Similar sort of the arguments have been advanced by Sri Prakash Singh, Chief Standing Counsel assisted by Sri Pankaj Srivastava, Addl. Chief Standing Counsel. He also urged that there was no occasion for the petitioner to file such a writ petition when it is known to all that the instant sensitive matter is pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, which is seized of the matter.

9. It has also be