Deciphering the Kashi Vishwanath-Gyanvapi dispute and why the Varanasi High Court ordered an ASI survey

*Paromita Das
On April 8, 2021, a Varanasi court granted permission for the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) to conduct a physical survey to determine whether the Gyanvapi Mosque was built on the ruins of the temple or not.

The order was issued by a civil judge (senior division) of the Varanasi Civil Court in response to a petition filed by advocate Vijay Shankar Rastogi on behalf of the temple’s main deity, Swayambhu Jyotirlinga Bhagwan Vishweshwar. The court also ordered the Uttar Pradesh government to pay for the survey, which should ideally include two members of the minority community. The Gyanvapi Mosque Management Committee, known as the Anjuman Intezamia Masjid, was opposed to this petition (AIM).

How Old Is the Gyanvapi Mosque’s Hindu Temple Claim?

The issue dates back to 1984, when 558 Hindu seers from across India gathered in the heart of Delhi. They gathered for the first religious parliament, which included a nationwide call for Hindus to lay claim to the holy shrines in Varanasi, Mathura, and Ayodhya, among other resolutions.

Years later, when the Babri Masjid and Ram Janmabhoomi controversy was at its peak in the 1990s, with the demand to build a Ram Mandir gaining strength and following, so did the movement to reclaim control of the Mathura and Kashi mosques.
While the movement frequently mentioned 3000 mosques, the Vishwa Hindu Parishad and other Hindu religious groups had their sights set on these two mosques in particular. The first was the Shahi Idgah mosque, which was built next to Lord Krishna’s temple in west UP’s Mathura, and the second was the Gyanvapi mosque, which was built next to the Kashi Vishwanath temple in east UP’s Varanasi.

Fearing for the country’s future, the PV Narsimha Rao government enacted the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act in 1991, which stated that the places of worship would be frozen as they were on August 15, 1947. The Bharatiya Janata Party, which was a minority in the opposition at the time, opposed this law. They had mocked the law as one of the’secular’ moves to ‘appease Muslims’ and protect their vote bank.

Why Are Muslims Concerned About the Kashi-Vishwanath Corridor?

The Kashi Vishwanath temple, built on the orders of Queen Ahilya Holkar, is widely regarded as Lord Shiva’s most important shrine. It is one of Shiva’s 12 Jyotirlingas, also known as Vishveshvara or Vishvanath, and is mentioned in the Skanda Purana.

Hindus from all over the country flock to the temple, which is always bustling with activity.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who represents the Varanasi constituency in the Lok Sabha, laid the foundation stone for the Kashi Vishwanath temple corridor in March 2019.

The plan is to enlarge and beautify the temple and its surroundings by adorning them with Makrana marble, Kota granite, Mandana, and Baleshwar stones. Once the over Rs 1,000 crore project is completed, the temple will be visible from the Ganga ghat.

In October 2018, a contractor demolished a platform (chabootra) at the Gyanvapi Mosque’s gate number 4 as part of the corridor construction. The Sunni Central Waqf Board owns the mosque. This heightened communal tensions in the area, prompting local Muslims to protest, and the contractor then rebuilt the damaged structure overnight.

The construction of the Kashi Vishwanath corridor has caused concern among Muslims in the area. During the time the platform was being dismantled, S M Yaseen, joint secretary of (AIM), stated that the ‘Gyanvapi mosque would meet the same fate as Babri.’

Similarly, work around the corridor has resulted in the removal of several shops and homes, broadening the lanes that lead to the mosque and exposing it like never before. Mufti Abdul Baatin Nomani, imam of the mosque and secretary of the AIM, stated that while they have no issues with the corridor, they are afraid. “The lanes restricted movement, and widening them could lead to an Ayodhya-style attack,” Nomani said.

Yaseen went on to say that, similar to what is happening now, the area around the mosque was cleared by the then-BJP government of Kalyan Singh in 1991 and 1992 for the ‘beautification’ of Ayodhya.

How Old Is the Case’s Legal Dispute?

It all began in 1991, when a petition was filed on behalf of the Swayambhu Jyotirlinga Bhagwan Vishweshwar, the temple’s main deity, by advocate Vijay Shankar Rastogi, claiming that Maharaja Vikramaditya built a temple on the site about 2,050 years ago. They claimed that the Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb demolished the temple in 1669, and that the mosque was built on top of the ruins of the temple.

Then, in 1780, Ahilya Holkar, the queen of Indore, built a new Kashi Vishwanath temple next to the mosque. Many consider it to be Lord Shiva’s most important shrine. It is one of Shiva’s 12 Jyotirlingas, Vishveshvara or Vishvanath, which is also mentioned in the Skanda Purana.

The petitioners demanded that the Gyanvapi Masjid be removed from the site; that the entire plot of land be returned to them, and that they be allowed to worship inside the mosque.

They argued that the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act did not apply in this case because the mosque was built over a partially demolished temple, and many parts of that temple can still be seen today.

The trial court in Varanasi framed preliminary issues in 1997, with the main contention being whether the issue was barred by Section 4 of the Act. The law states that the religious character of a place of worship must remain as it was on August 15, 1947. Section 4 (Part ii) of the Act states:
If any suit, appeal, or other proceeding relating to the conversion of the religious character of any place of worship was pending before any court, tribunal, or other authority on the 15th day of August, 1947, it shall be discontinued, and no suit, appeal, or other proceeding relating to any such matter shall lie on or after such commencement in any court, tribunal, or other authority:

Following hearings, the trial court ruled that the petitioners’ requested relief was barred by the Act. This was followed by the filing of revision petitions. They were clubbed and were being tried in Varanasi’s trial court.
During this time, the Anjuman Intezamia Masjid Committee petitioned the Allahabad High Court, claiming that the dispute could not be resolved by a civil court and citing Section 4 of the Places of Worship Act. The Supreme Court responded by staying the proceedings in the lower court, where the case had been pending for 22 years.

Then, in December 2019, a month after the Supreme Court issued its decision in the Babri Masjid-Ram Janmabhoomi dispute, VS Rastogi filed a petition on behalf of the same Swayambhu Jyotirlinga Bhagwan Vishweshwar, requesting an archaeological survey of the Gyanvapi mosque complex. Rastogi filed the petition in Varanasi court as the deity Visheshwar’s “next friend.”

His petition stated that in a 1998 order, the first additional district judge directed a lower court to take evidence from the entire Gyanvapi compound in order to determine the religious status or character of the compound. This hearing, however, was postponed due to a stay order issued by the Allahabad High Court.

Despite the fact that the trial has been stayed by the concerned high court, which has yet to deliver its verdict, the Varanasi court ordered the ASI to conduct a survey of the mosque on April 8, 2021. The Sunni Waqf Board has stated that they will appeal the order.
“From what we understand, this case is barred by the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act of 1991.” In the Ayodhya judgement, a 5-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court upheld the Places of Worship Act. As such, the status of Gyanvapi Masjid is unquestionable,” said Zufar Faruqi, Chairman of the UP Sunni Central Waqf Board.

What Has Varanasi’s High Court Said?

The Court requested that the ASI form a “five-member committee of eminent persons who are experts and well-versed in archaeology.” “At least two of the experts should preferably be from a minority community,” the court ruled.
The ASI chief has also been asked to bring in an eminent person to serve as an observer for the committee, and the UP government has been directed to bear the cost of the survey.

“The primary goal of the Archaeological Survey will be to determine whether the religious structure currently standing at the ‘disputed site’ is a superimposition, alteration, addition, or if there is any kind of structural overlapping with or over any other religious structure.”

Among other things, the court has issued the following instructions:

Artifacts must be properly preserved during the survey.
The committee must ensure that Muslims are not prevented from offering namaz at the disputed site while conducting the survey.
However, the Court also stated that if the same is not feasible due to survey work, the Committee shall provide Muslims with an alternative, suitable location to offer namaz at any other location within the Mosques precincts.
The court stated that the panel is expected to be aware of the sensitive nature of the situation and must ensure that both Hindus and Muslims are treated equally.
After the survey is completed, the Committee’s report should be submitted in a sealed cover as soon as possible.