<p>Budaun (UP): A dispute relating to Neelkanth Mahadev Temple and Shamsi Jama Masjid being heard in a local court was deferred on Wednesday owing to the judge's transfer, a lawyer said.</p>.<p>Judge Amit Kumar, who was hearing the case, was transferred to Bhadohi and his court remains vacant, the lawyer added.</p>.<p>The matter was therefore deferred to April 21.</p>.<p>The fast-track court of judge Amit Kumar had previously granted the Muslim side a final opportunity to appear in court after repeated absences of their legal representatives.</p>.<p>Despite the court's repeated summons, the advocates representing the mosque's management committee failed to appear.</p>.<p>The judge had initially set February 11 as the last chance for them to present their case.</p>.<p>However, owing to a strike of lawyers, the hearing was postponed to March 10 following which the matter was adjourned to March 20.</p>.<p>According to Ved Prakash Sahu, the advocate representing the temple side, Anwar Alam, the lawyer for the Shamsi Jama Masjid management committee, had appeared in court on March 20 and submitted an application.</p>.<p>Alam, Sahu had said, relied on a Supreme Court order and argued that subordinate courts couldn't pass judgments in such matters.</p>.<p>Considering this, judge Kumar set April 2 as the next date.</p>.<p>"Since a new judge will now take charge, if the court permits the case to proceed, arguments from both sides will have to begin afresh," Sahu said.</p>
<p>Budaun (UP): A dispute relating to Neelkanth Mahadev Temple and Shamsi Jama Masjid being heard in a local court was deferred on Wednesday owing to the judge's transfer, a lawyer said.</p>.<p>Judge Amit Kumar, who was hearing the case, was transferred to Bhadohi and his court remains vacant, the lawyer added.</p>.<p>The matter was therefore deferred to April 21.</p>.<p>The fast-track court of judge Amit Kumar had previously granted the Muslim side a final opportunity to appear in court after repeated absences of their legal representatives.</p>.<p>Despite the court's repeated summons, the advocates representing the mosque's management committee failed to appear.</p>.<p>The judge had initially set February 11 as the last chance for them to present their case.</p>.<p>However, owing to a strike of lawyers, the hearing was postponed to March 10 following which the matter was adjourned to March 20.</p>.<p>According to Ved Prakash Sahu, the advocate representing the temple side, Anwar Alam, the lawyer for the Shamsi Jama Masjid management committee, had appeared in court on March 20 and submitted an application.</p>.<p>Alam, Sahu had said, relied on a Supreme Court order and argued that subordinate courts couldn't pass judgments in such matters.</p>.<p>Considering this, judge Kumar set April 2 as the next date.</p>.<p>"Since a new judge will now take charge, if the court permits the case to proceed, arguments from both sides will have to begin afresh," Sahu said.</p>