The Supreme Court is to hear the appeals against the Allahabad High Court judgement on the Ayodhya matter. Instead of doing so, the chief justice has asked the parties to go for an out of court settlement.
There is a long history of negotiations and talks in the matter. All these have proved infructuous. The situation changed after the demolition of the Babri Masjid in 1992 and there was no scope for further talks as one side had unilaterally taken steps to demolish the mosque. For the higher judiciary to now suggest talks is to ignore how the law was broken and the constitution trampled upon.
It is also objectionable that the chief justice has asked Subramaniam Swamy to consult the concerned parties whether they can hold talks. First of all Subramaniam Swamy is not a petitioner in the case. Further he has been a known advocate for removing the mosque and building a temple at the spot.
The judicial process is concerned with who has the title to the land where the Babri Masjid stood. The Supreme Court must adjudicate on this matter before it and discharge its judicial responsibility.