The Supreme Court on Friday refused to interfere with the Madhya Pradesh high court’s decision upholding the demolition of the 200-year-old Takiya Masjid in Ujjain, dismissing a plea filed by worshippers who challenged the state’s action and sought reconstruction of the mosque.
A bench of justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta said it found no infirmity in the high court’s ruling and that the petitioners were free to pursue remedies available under law, including compensation where due.
“This is a case that warrants immediate intervention,” senior advocate MR Shamshad, appearing for the petitioners, urged, as he argued that the mosque was razed to expand a parking facility for the adjoining Mahakaleshwar Temple. Shamshad also disputed the high court’s observation that the right to practice religion has no connection with any particular place, adding the mosque was a duly notified Waqf property since 1985 and had continued to function as a place of worship until its demolition.
But the bench declined to reopen the issue. “No, the high court has given sound reasoning that compensation shall be paid, if warranted. There is nothing in it. You have your remedies under the law.” The petition was accordingly dismissed at the threshold.
The petition before the top court was filed by 13 local residents who said they regularly offered namaz at Takiya Masjid. They contended that the structure, notified as waqf in 1985 and used as a functional place of worship, was demolished “illegally and arbitrarily” in January despite constitutional and statutory protections. The petition alleged violations of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, the Waqf Act, and the land acquisition law governing compensation and rehabilitation, while further alleging that compensation was wrongly disbursed to encroachers to “create a false case of acquisition”.
The Madhya Pradesh high court, however, had rejected these claims in a series of orders, holding that the mosque and the land on which it stood were lawfully acquired for the expansion of the Mahakal Lok complex, a major redevelopment project linked to the Mahakaleshwar Temple, one of the 12 Jyotirlingas.
The high court relied on precedent to hold that the right to practise religion does not attach to any particular place of worship, noting that acquisition of land does not infringe Article 25 so long as the freedom to practice the faith itself remains unaffected. The high court had also pointed out that compensation was assessed and disbursed by the land acquisition officer to those found entitled.
In dismissing the appeal on Friday, the apex court did not reopen any factual dispute or examine the legality of the acquisition, reiterating only that the petitioners retained legal avenues if they sought compensation or further remedies under applicable statutes. For now, the demolition stands, and the site remains part of the ongoing redevelopment and parking expansion around the Mahakaleshwar Temple.
