Former Jammu and Kashmir chief minister Farooq Abdullah want the Ayodhya issue to be resolved through dialogue between concerned parties and not by the court.
Farooq Abdullah, said, " This(Ayodhya) issue should be discussed and sorted out across the table between people. Why drag the issue to the Court? I am sure it can be resolved through dialogue. Lord Ram belongs to the whole world, not just Hindus."
The Supreme Court has said that further orders on the Ayodhya case will be passed by a 3 judge Bench on January 10. The newly constituted Bench would decide on the date of the hearing and also whether the case would be heard on a day to day basis.
At the same time, the court Rejected a PIL filed on the Ram temple. The petition was filed by lawyer Harinath Ram in November 2018. In which he had asked for the hearing of this case immediately and regularly.
Earlier, the court had said on October 29 last year that this matter will be listed before the appropriate bench in the first week of January, which will determine the program for its hearing. Later, All India Hindu Mahasabha filed an application and requested the date of the hearing before, but the court refused to do so. The court had said that on October 29, the order has already been passed regarding the hearing of this case. The Hindu Mahasabha is a defendant in the appeal filed by the heirs of M Siddique, one of the original plaintiffs in this case.
Let us note that on September 27, 2018, the three-member bench, headed by the Chief Justice Deepak Mishra, refused to send a comment in a decision made in 1994 with a majority of 2: 1 in the decision of the five judges for fresh consideration. Had given. It was commented in this verdict that the mosque is not an integral part of Islam. During the hearing of the Ayodhya affair, an appellant's lawyer raised the issue of this comment made in the 1994 judgment.
