Today, On 7th November, Supreme Court declined to interfere in the demolition of Ujjain’s 200-year-old Takiya Mosque, observing that the action was taken under a statutory framework and that the government had already provided due compensation before the demolition.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court today declined to intervene in the demolition of Ujjain’s historic Takiya Mosque, which has stood for 200 years.
A bench led by Justice Vikram Nath observed that the demolition was mandated by a statutory framework and that the government had provided necessary compensation prior to the demolition.
In January, state authorities demolished the Takiya Mosque along with 257 homes to facilitate the Mahakaleshwar Temple Corridor Project, which includes creating additional parking space.
Notably, the government has already disbursed Rs 33 crore of the Rs 66 crore allocated for compensating displaced families before the demolition commenced.
The site is being cleared to accommodate expanded vehicular parking and a Pravachan Hall, crucial for the upcoming 2028 Ujjain Simhastha (Kumbh).
A plea was brought before the Supreme Court contesting the Madhya Pradesh High Court’s ruling that upheld the demolition. The Supreme Court was informed that the mosque, recognized as waqf property in 1985, remained an active place of worship until its “illegal and arbitrary demolition” in January.
During today’s proceedings, the bench was informed that the High Court’s rationale warranted further examination.
It was stated in court,
“The reasoning in the impugned order is that people may offer prayer even in house or elsewhere. This is the reasoning,”
In response, the bench remarked,
“The high court has made a very good reasoning that the petition was dismissed and withdrawn, compensation paid… dismissed.”
The counsel continued,
“Because you need parking for some other religious place you demolish the mosque and say you don’t have a right?”
The plea contended that the demolition contravened several laws, including the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, the Waqf Act, 1995, and the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.
Allegations were also made regarding significant irregularities in the state’s land acquisition process, asserting that compensation was improperly granted to unauthorized occupants and encroachers to fabricate a false case of acquisition.
A petition was submitted to the Supreme Court by 13 residents of Ujjain who reported regularly offering namaz at Takiya Masjid.
They claimed that the structure, designated as a waqf in 1985 and functioning as a place of worship, was demolished “illegally and arbitrarily” in January despite constitutional and statutory protections.
The High Court had relied on precedent to establish that the right to practice religion does not depend on any specific place of worship, indicating that land acquisition does not violate Article 25 as long as the freedom to practice the faith remains unaffected.
Furthermore, the High Court noted that compensation was assessed and disbursed by the land acquisition officer to those deemed eligible.
Case Title: MOHAMMED TAIYAB Vs STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH