<p>In a significant ruling, a Varanasi court on Tuesday directed to club all the seven cases pertaining to the Gyanvapi Mosque dispute being heard at different courts in Varanasi.</p>.<p>District judge A K Vishwesh passed the order on an application filed by four Hindu women, who had contended in their application that all the seven cases which were being heard at different courts in Varanasi, were of a 'similar' nature and that they should be clubbed and heard by a single court.</p>.<p><strong>Also Read | <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/national/gyanvapi-row-supreme-court-defers-allahabad-hc-order-allowing-scientific-survey-of-shivling-1220153.html" target="_blank">Gyanvapi row: Supreme Court defers Allahabad HC order allowing scientific survey of ‘Shivling’</a></strong></p>.<p>They also contended that hearings at different courts created confusion among the people which was not good for the judicial process.</p>.<p>The court accepted their plea and directed clubbing of all the seven cases. The cases include alleged discovery of a 'shivling' inside the Gyanvapi Mosque premises, demand for scientific surveys of the 'shivling' and the Mosque premises, and the permission to worship at the Shringar Gauri temple inside the Mosque.</p>.<p>The Muslim litigants however said that they would challenge the district court's order in the high court.</p>.<p>The decision comes close on the heels of the order of the same court admitting the plea seeking a survey of the entire Gyanvapi Mosque premises by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI).</p>.<p>Barely a few days back the Allahabad High Court had directed the ASI to conduct a scientific investigation through carbon dating to ascertain the age of the 'shivling', which was allegedly found inside the Mosque premises during a videographic survey last year, without causing any damage to the structure.</p>.<p>The Hindu lawyers had claimed that a 'shivling' was found at a small pond after which the court had ordered sealing of the place. The lawyers representing the Muslim parties, however, refuted the claim and said that what was being called a 'shivling' was in fact a 'fountain'.</p>
<p>In a significant ruling, a Varanasi court on Tuesday directed to club all the seven cases pertaining to the Gyanvapi Mosque dispute being heard at different courts in Varanasi.</p>.<p>District judge A K Vishwesh passed the order on an application filed by four Hindu women, who had contended in their application that all the seven cases which were being heard at different courts in Varanasi, were of a 'similar' nature and that they should be clubbed and heard by a single court.</p>.<p><strong>Also Read | <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/national/gyanvapi-row-supreme-court-defers-allahabad-hc-order-allowing-scientific-survey-of-shivling-1220153.html" target="_blank">Gyanvapi row: Supreme Court defers Allahabad HC order allowing scientific survey of ‘Shivling’</a></strong></p>.<p>They also contended that hearings at different courts created confusion among the people which was not good for the judicial process.</p>.<p>The court accepted their plea and directed clubbing of all the seven cases. The cases include alleged discovery of a 'shivling' inside the Gyanvapi Mosque premises, demand for scientific surveys of the 'shivling' and the Mosque premises, and the permission to worship at the Shringar Gauri temple inside the Mosque.</p>.<p>The Muslim litigants however said that they would challenge the district court's order in the high court.</p>.<p>The decision comes close on the heels of the order of the same court admitting the plea seeking a survey of the entire Gyanvapi Mosque premises by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI).</p>.<p>Barely a few days back the Allahabad High Court had directed the ASI to conduct a scientific investigation through carbon dating to ascertain the age of the 'shivling', which was allegedly found inside the Mosque premises during a videographic survey last year, without causing any damage to the structure.</p>.<p>The Hindu lawyers had claimed that a 'shivling' was found at a small pond after which the court had ordered sealing of the place. The lawyers representing the Muslim parties, however, refuted the claim and said that what was being called a 'shivling' was in fact a 'fountain'.</p>
