No reopening of claims in Mathura and Varanasi: Sunni Board's proposed 'terms of settlement' in Ayodhya case

No reopening of Ayodhya-like hotspots such as Mathura and Varanasi in the future, and rebuilding of the demolished Babri Masjid at another spot - these are two of the main proposed "terms of settlement", according to sources, offered by the Sunni Central Wakf Board to settle the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid land dispute.

The offer was made by the Wakf Board through the Supreme Court-mandated mediation panel on Wednesday , the day the Supreme Court concluded its 40-day long hearing on the title suit and reserved its verdict.

The terms of settlement include implementation of the 1991 Places of Worship Act which freezes all places of worship in India to as they existed in 1947, a proposal that may not be accepted by some Hindu parties. The settlement terms also include a suggestion to open a few more ASI managed historic mosques for prayers.

The Board proposes that the demolished Babri masjid be repaired and rebuilt elsewhere. If all these terms are acceptable to all key players in the case, the offer envisages allowing the central government moving in and acquiring a 1500 square yard area which is now referred to the inner and outer courtyards for building a Ram temple.

The terms of the proposed settlement, though politically contentious, can be used by the court to mould relief in the case. The Board, which is spearheading the case for the Muslims, wants the controversy over ownership capped at Ayodhya.

The court will have to lay down that Ayodhya will not be precedent to opening up ownership issues involving other places of worship if it wants to Muslim parties to walk away from the disputed land.

The court will also have to provide for alternative land and mechanism to ensure that the demolished structure is restored at some other site to mollify the hurt sentiments of the Muslims. The offer insists on the repair of all mosques in Ayodhya, and includes a proposal to set up a trust to promote national harmony.

The court will also have to work out an internecine war between the two main Hindu parties in the case – the Akhara and the deity, represented by the next friend, for sole possession.

The Akhara, the sebait of the deity, is unwilling to relinquish its claims to any newly-created entity such as the Ramjanmabhoomi Nyas or any other entity. It alleges politics behind floating of the Nyas to edge it out of the race for possession and management of the deity.

Sources said that the “proposed terms of settlement” had been filed in the apex court. Not everyone has signed it, only a few have signed, the sources said on condition of anonymity.

The Nirmohi Akhara, which boycotted the second round of mediation, said Wednesday that it hadn’t received any offer.“We have received no offer,” said Karttik Chopra, spokesperson and Mukhtar Panch Ramanandi Nirmohi Akhara, Ayodhya. “How can there be a settlement without us?”

Board lawyer Zafaryab Jilani though denied reports that it proposed to withdraw the court case if these terms of settlement were accepted. “Any withdrawal application will be made in court,” he told reporters.