Bharat Rakshak

SC says Centre will formulate a scheme in three months to set up a board of trustees for construction of temple at the disputed structure

Finally some good news!

We win!

Hindus will get the land. Center to formulate trust to construct a Temple.

Awesome deck cleared for bhavya Shree Ram Mandir!!!

Central govt has 3 months to set up a Trust to build a temple and mosque, disputed land title still not clear..

Mandir Wahi Banega!

एक ही नारा एक ही नाम जय श्री राम जय श्री राम !

A suitable plot of land measuring 5 acre shall be given to Sunni Waqf Board by state or centre in Ayodhya.

5 acres to be given to Sunni waqf board. To be decided in 3 months by a trust.

Congratulations!

When can I go do kar seva?

Sunni Waqf Board will build the mosque.

Sanju wrote:Mandir Wahi Banega!

finally !

Disputed structure given to Ramjanmabhoomi NYAS !!

YUP !!

Hindus got 2.7+ acres. Muslims got 5 acres. 1:2 secularism of Colonial court

Ramana Ji's prediction upheld !

Sickularism at its best.

Najunamar wrote:When can I go do kar seva?

VHP should ask for a brick from every house. Let this be an opportunity to bring all Hindu samaj together irrespective of caste.

Guys why 5 acres to other party? They lost the case, first time am seeing a losing party getting rewarded. Destroy a religion's holy site, build your structure over it, now when natives reclaim the place, get a bigger land for new structure.

Sicanta wrote:SC- temple not destroyed to built mosque as per asi

My interpretation and this will change as more info pours in and solely based on Sicanta Quote of SC above which can be disregarded if untrue

1) If ASI states "Temple NOT destroyed to build Mosque" is True... there is very little Locus Standi for Hindus.

2) Essentially nobody disputes that Ayodhya (Town) is the birthplace for Ram.

3) Babri Complex is not a Mosque as there was no Wakf board constituted and moreover Wakf board does not inherit Mughal Land.

4) What was disputed is the particular location of RamJanamBhoomi previously occupied by the erstwhile Babri "Masjid" until 1993. The Hindu case rests on the assumption that an earlier temple was destroyed to make a Islamic Structure by perhaps Babur/Baqi/Aurangazeb. If ASI states that there was no preexisting Temple ergo: destruction of Babri "Masjid" was wrong, placing of idols in 1949 also wrong / desecretion.

5) As per my understanding based solely on data available to me it appears In 1800s a group of Hindu Ascetics captured / took physical control of the Babri Complex which was previously also visited by many Hindus for pilgrimage (driven by deep and unquestioned faith of Hindus).

6) Based on above SC has said land belongs to Government. Onus on GoI to take further action with the property it owns and act in best interests of the nation.

CAVEAT: This is my initial assessment and is subject to change based on more data

Now can we dig deep and carry out full excavation at site and unearth original mandir in its full glory to have solid undisputed and documented proof to be used as template that can be used for every other demolished temple everywhere in India!

NDTV is not happy that says who won

williams wrote:NDTV is not happy that says who won

The order side has won saar. They had nothing to claim and nothing to lose, but they got 5 acres land. We just got what was ours.

Spare a moment to humble Kar Sevaks and others who staked everything gave thier work, did not worry about family over the centuries for us to have this day.

Karthik S wrote:Guys why 5 acres to other party? They lost the case, first time am seeing a losing party getting rewarded. Destroy a religion's holy site, build your structure over it, now when natives reclaim the place, get a bigger land for new structure.

+ 1 . Indian sickularism in action

Karthik S wrote:

williams wrote:NDTV is not happy that says who won

The order side has won saar. They had nothing to claim and nothing to lose, but they got 5 acres land. We just got what was ours.

A different point of view I guess. Let's agree to disagree. Given the circumstances this the best we could expect.

We all need to rejuvenate and rebuild the huge structure befitting Rama, hope to do my bit in every way possible. Trust will need funds, kar sevaks I guess for ensuring the temple is built to reflect our aspirations.

Aditya_V wrote:

Karthik S wrote:
The order side has won saar. They had nothing to claim and nothing to lose, but they got 5 acres land. We just got what was ours.

A different point of view I guess. Let's agree to disagree. Given the circumstances this the best we could expect.

Agreed

Why the rona dhona? What we got is the best result we could have expected

'Hey Ram'
Siyawara Ramchandra ki Jai
Of the Trinity : One is released from the 'bandan' and when the other {Yaanki Shivji} be released
Napak iraada in Kartarpur neatly confined to bylanes by the Ji Huzoor's
Liberandu's will claim that Namo-Shamo had a hand in it

Shows the quality of 2019 victory of Modiji.

Noob Pooch
5 acres of suitable land
Kahan par denge 5 acres

It cannot be anywhere near the temple or they will create trouble - taqquiya

Aditya_V wrote:

Karthik S wrote:
The order side has won saar. They had nothing to claim and nothing to lose, but they got 5 acres land. We just got what was ours.

A different point of view I guess. Let's agree to disagree. Given the circumstances this the best we could expect.

We can but sorry sir, the line reeks of insecurity and cowardliness. The other side was fighting using "adverse claim", SC said it's not applicable. Case over. Why order 5 acres land to losing side? It's age old sickularism. Am sure other side is going back laughing and happy.

ramana wrote:Nachiket,

I expect 5-0 verdict in favor of #JaiShriRam

That's called a prediction. Please take a bow, ramana sir.

manish singh wrote:Shows the quality of 2019 victory of Modiji.

Where modi came into this?

Anyway, koti koti naman to kar sevaks who fought and even lost their lives over the years. Am sure their atmas would have attained moksha and be with lord rama

To me, this almost feels like a case where the Supreme Court of India's relevance was at stake more than the RJB judgement; and I think the honors had an inkling of that. If this judgement had gone any other way, SCI's crediblity, already under some question, would have suffered severely with about 70% of the country. The other 20% would have been ecstatic, though.

Karthik S wrote:Guys why 5 acres to other party? They lost the case, first time am seeing a losing party getting rewarded. Destroy a religion's holy site, build your structure over it, now when natives reclaim the place, get a bigger land for new structure.

As per SC and ASI there was no pre existing Temple and I for one await clarity on this matter. Essentially the place is simply a property dispute where both Hindus and Muslims were offering prayers without clear titles. Since no one can prove ownership title vests with Government which may decide to give that particular location to a Temple. However given that there definitely was an Islamic structure erstwhile "Babri Masjid" the same has to be compensated by Government and SC has suggested a 5acre plot be given to Muslims in Ayodhya itself in return for 2.7Acres of Plot for RJB in disputed location.