<p>The Supreme Court on Friday <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/national/ayodhya-dispute-sc-grants-more-time-to-mediation-panel-733067.html" target="_blank">granted a mediation panel headed by former judge, Justice F M I Kalifullah, further time till August 15</a> to find out an amicable resolution of the vexed Ayodhya dispute, related to Babri Masjid and Ram Temple.</p>.<p>On March 8, the court had referred the 70-year-old dispute for mediation by a panel headed by Justice Kalifulla to find out the possibility of an amicable settlement, though Hindu sides have opposed it. DH recaps the important landmarks that have brought the Ayodhya dispute to where it is today.<br /><br /><strong>1992</strong><br /><br />December 6 - Babri Masjid demolished by some 2,00,000 karsevaks.<br /><br />December 16 - The Liberhan Ayodhya Commission of Inquiry was set up by the Congress government headed by PV Narasimha Rao.</p>.<p><br /><strong>1993</strong><br /><br />April 3 - Acquisition of Certain Area at Ayodhya Act is passed due to the acquisition of land in the disputed area.<br /><br />Ismail Faruqui and others file a written petition challenging some aspects of the act.</p>.<p><strong>1994</strong><br /><br />The Supreme Court in the Ismail Faruqui case says that ‘Mosque’ is not integral to Islam owing to the fact that ‘Namaz’ can be offered anywhere.</p>.<p><strong>2002</strong><br /><br />The three-judge bench begins hearing on determining who the land belongs to. The Archaeological Survey of India is directed to verify the presence of a temple in the site of Babri Masjid. </p>.<p><strong>2003</strong><br /><br />In the Mohd. Aslam Alias Bhure vs. Union of India & Others case, Supreme Court says that no religious activity shall be conducted in the disputed land. </p>.<p>Archaeological Survey of India finds evidence of the presence of a temple under the mosque. The findings are disputed by Muslim organisations. </p>.<p><strong>2009</strong><br /><br />June 30 - Liberhan Commission submits its final report. The findings of the report, however, weren't made public. <br /><br /><strong>2010</strong><br /><br />The High Court rules that the disputed land be divided into three parts. One-third of the allotted to Ram Lalla Virajman, who was represented by the Akhil Bharatiya Hindu Mahasabha, one-third would go to the Sunni Waqf Board and the remaining one-third to the Nirmohi Akhara.</p>.<p>The case moves on to the Supreme Court following the verdict by the High Court.</p>.<p><strong>2011</strong><br /><br />May 9 - Supreme Court stays the High Court order. </p>.<p><strong>2016</strong><br /><br />Subramanian Swamy files plea to the Supreme Court for the construction of a Hindu temple in the disputed land. </p>.<p><strong>2017</strong><br /><br />March 21 - The Supreme Court suggests out of court settlement.</p>.<p>May 30 - Murli Manohar Joshi, Uma Bharti, L K Advani and Vinay Katiyar are all charged with criminal conspiracy to demolish the Babri Masjid. </p>.<p>August 8 - UP Shia Central Waqf Board tells the Supreme Court that the mosque can be constructed at a close distance to the demolition site. </p>.<p>August 11 - The Supreme Court schedules hearing of 13 appeals in the title dispute on December 5, 2017.</p>.<p>November 20 - UP Shia Central Waqf board tells Supreme Court that temple can be built in Ayodhya and a mosque in Lucknow. </p>.<p>December 1 - 32 civil rights activists file a plea to the Supreme Court challenging the verdict of 2010 Allahabad case. </p>.<p>December 5 - The final hearings in the Ayodhya land dispute begin. The bench includes former Chief Justice of India Dipak Mishra. </p>.<p><strong>2018</strong><br /><br />February 8 - Supreme Court begins the hearings for the civil appeals.</p>.<p>March 14 - Supreme Court rejects interim pleas. Tells them to intervene as parties in the case. The interim pleas include the one from Subramanian Swamy. </p>.<p>April 6 - Rajeev Dhavan files a plea to the Supreme Court requesting for the 1994 judgement to be referred to a five-judge bench.<br />September 27 - Supreme Court declines the request for constituting a larger bench. The case would move forward with a three-judge bench. </p>.<p>October 29 - A three-judge bench, headed by current CJI Ranjan Gogoi, says that “the appropriate Bench will fix the schedule with regard to the hearing of appeals in the case”. </p>.<p><strong>2019</strong><br /><br />January 4 - A two-judge bench says that an ‘appropriate bench’ will take up the case from January 10. <br /><br />January 8 - The Supreme Court notifies that a five-judge bench will take up the case moving forward. The bench, headed by Ranjan Gogoi, would consist of India's five most senior Supreme Court judges. <br /><br />January 20 - Justice UU Lalit recuses himself and the hearing is postponed. </p>.<p>January 29 - The hearing gets postponed again as Justices Ashok Bhushan and S Abdul Nazeer are replaced with Justices NV Ramana and UU Lalit.</p>.<p>February 26 - A court-monitored mediation process between the parties involved is proposed by the Supreme Court. </p>.<p>March 8 - Justice F M I Kalifulla, as Chairman, spiritual leader Sri Sri Ravishankar and senior advocate Sriram Panchu are chosen as the mediators for the Ayodhya land dispute. </p>.<p>May 10 - The three-member mediation team submits the final report to the Supreme Court. </p>
<p>The Supreme Court on Friday <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/national/ayodhya-dispute-sc-grants-more-time-to-mediation-panel-733067.html" target="_blank">granted a mediation panel headed by former judge, Justice F M I Kalifullah, further time till August 15</a> to find out an amicable resolution of the vexed Ayodhya dispute, related to Babri Masjid and Ram Temple.</p>.<p>On March 8, the court had referred the 70-year-old dispute for mediation by a panel headed by Justice Kalifulla to find out the possibility of an amicable settlement, though Hindu sides have opposed it. DH recaps the important landmarks that have brought the Ayodhya dispute to where it is today.<br /><br /><strong>1992</strong><br /><br />December 6 - Babri Masjid demolished by some 2,00,000 karsevaks.<br /><br />December 16 - The Liberhan Ayodhya Commission of Inquiry was set up by the Congress government headed by PV Narasimha Rao.</p>.<p><br /><strong>1993</strong><br /><br />April 3 - Acquisition of Certain Area at Ayodhya Act is passed due to the acquisition of land in the disputed area.<br /><br />Ismail Faruqui and others file a written petition challenging some aspects of the act.</p>.<p><strong>1994</strong><br /><br />The Supreme Court in the Ismail Faruqui case says that ‘Mosque’ is not integral to Islam owing to the fact that ‘Namaz’ can be offered anywhere.</p>.<p><strong>2002</strong><br /><br />The three-judge bench begins hearing on determining who the land belongs to. The Archaeological Survey of India is directed to verify the presence of a temple in the site of Babri Masjid. </p>.<p><strong>2003</strong><br /><br />In the Mohd. Aslam Alias Bhure vs. Union of India & Others case, Supreme Court says that no religious activity shall be conducted in the disputed land. </p>.<p>Archaeological Survey of India finds evidence of the presence of a temple under the mosque. The findings are disputed by Muslim organisations. </p>.<p><strong>2009</strong><br /><br />June 30 - Liberhan Commission submits its final report. The findings of the report, however, weren't made public. <br /><br /><strong>2010</strong><br /><br />The High Court rules that the disputed land be divided into three parts. One-third of the allotted to Ram Lalla Virajman, who was represented by the Akhil Bharatiya Hindu Mahasabha, one-third would go to the Sunni Waqf Board and the remaining one-third to the Nirmohi Akhara.</p>.<p>The case moves on to the Supreme Court following the verdict by the High Court.</p>.<p><strong>2011</strong><br /><br />May 9 - Supreme Court stays the High Court order. </p>.<p><strong>2016</strong><br /><br />Subramanian Swamy files plea to the Supreme Court for the construction of a Hindu temple in the disputed land. </p>.<p><strong>2017</strong><br /><br />March 21 - The Supreme Court suggests out of court settlement.</p>.<p>May 30 - Murli Manohar Joshi, Uma Bharti, L K Advani and Vinay Katiyar are all charged with criminal conspiracy to demolish the Babri Masjid. </p>.<p>August 8 - UP Shia Central Waqf Board tells the Supreme Court that the mosque can be constructed at a close distance to the demolition site. </p>.<p>August 11 - The Supreme Court schedules hearing of 13 appeals in the title dispute on December 5, 2017.</p>.<p>November 20 - UP Shia Central Waqf board tells Supreme Court that temple can be built in Ayodhya and a mosque in Lucknow. </p>.<p>December 1 - 32 civil rights activists file a plea to the Supreme Court challenging the verdict of 2010 Allahabad case. </p>.<p>December 5 - The final hearings in the Ayodhya land dispute begin. The bench includes former Chief Justice of India Dipak Mishra. </p>.<p><strong>2018</strong><br /><br />February 8 - Supreme Court begins the hearings for the civil appeals.</p>.<p>March 14 - Supreme Court rejects interim pleas. Tells them to intervene as parties in the case. The interim pleas include the one from Subramanian Swamy. </p>.<p>April 6 - Rajeev Dhavan files a plea to the Supreme Court requesting for the 1994 judgement to be referred to a five-judge bench.<br />September 27 - Supreme Court declines the request for constituting a larger bench. The case would move forward with a three-judge bench. </p>.<p>October 29 - A three-judge bench, headed by current CJI Ranjan Gogoi, says that “the appropriate Bench will fix the schedule with regard to the hearing of appeals in the case”. </p>.<p><strong>2019</strong><br /><br />January 4 - A two-judge bench says that an ‘appropriate bench’ will take up the case from January 10. <br /><br />January 8 - The Supreme Court notifies that a five-judge bench will take up the case moving forward. The bench, headed by Ranjan Gogoi, would consist of India's five most senior Supreme Court judges. <br /><br />January 20 - Justice UU Lalit recuses himself and the hearing is postponed. </p>.<p>January 29 - The hearing gets postponed again as Justices Ashok Bhushan and S Abdul Nazeer are replaced with Justices NV Ramana and UU Lalit.</p>.<p>February 26 - A court-monitored mediation process between the parties involved is proposed by the Supreme Court. </p>.<p>March 8 - Justice F M I Kalifulla, as Chairman, spiritual leader Sri Sri Ravishankar and senior advocate Sriram Panchu are chosen as the mediators for the Ayodhya land dispute. </p>.<p>May 10 - The three-member mediation team submits the final report to the Supreme Court. </p>
