Court reserves order as Hindu side presses for survey
Team Clarion
JAUNPUR — Despite multiple notices, the Muslim side did not file an objection to the survey order of Atala Masjid in the Jaunpur city Munsif Court on Monday. The dispute centres around the Hindu side’s claim that a temple dedicated to Atala Devi once stood on the mosque’s site.
During the hearing, the court took a strict stance on the failure to comply with its orders. After listening to the arguments from both sides, it reserved its order on the matter.
The Muslim side’s advocate argued that the case falls under the Places of Worship Act, 1991 and is already pending before the Supreme Court. “No hearing should take place in this case until the Supreme Court decides on the matter,” the advocate stated. However, the Hindu side continued to push for a survey of the mosque, challenging the Muslim side’s position.
Atala Masjid, situated in Sipahi Mohalla of Jaunpur, has been a place of Muslim worship since 1476, according to the Muslim side. They strongly refute the Hindu side’s claims, asserting, “Namaz has been offered here for centuries, and the mosque was not constructed by demolishing a temple.” In contrast, the Hindu petitioners maintain that a temple built by King Vijay Chandra in the 13th century existed on the site.
Muslim leaders and community members have criticised the demand for a survey, calling it an attempt to target and harass the Muslim community. “This is a completely baseless claim aimed at creating unnecessary communal tension,” said Mohammad Arif, a local Muslim leader. “Muslims have been praying here for centuries, and now some groups are trying to disturb the peace by making false claims.”
Another community member, Shafiq Ahmed, expressed concern over what he described as increasing pressure on Muslim places of worship. “This is not about history or justice; this is about harassing Muslims and questioning their rights. We strongly oppose this unjustified demand,” he said.
Prominent Islamic scholar Maulana Rashid Qasmi condemned the move, calling it a deliberate attempt to undermine communal harmony. “The Constitution of India guarantees freedom of religion, yet we see repeated attempts to question the legitimacy of mosques that have stood for centuries. This must stop,” he said.
A resident, Farzana Begum, echoed these sentiments: “These claims are a direct attack on our religious identity. Our ancestors have worshipped here for generations, and now we are being forced to prove our rightful place in our own country.”
Meanwhile, Syed Imran, a member of the Waqf Board, described the legal battle as “politically motivated” and intended to “polarise communities ahead of elections in the state.” He urged authorities to intervene and prevent further escalation. “The judiciary must ensure that such baseless claims do not disrupt social harmony. The law is clear, and the Places of Worship Act must be upheld.”
The case was previously addressed on 18 February when the court stated that the hearing would proceed based on a monitoring petition filed by the Waqf Board. Swaraj Vahini Association (SVA), the plaintiff, has raised objections to this petition. Santosh Kumar Mishra, an SVA representative, submitted the original claim, insisting that the site was historically a Hindu temple.