New Delhi, Jan 31 (UNI) The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed an application seeking permission to conduct Urs between February one and three at a Dargah allegedly located at the Gir Somnath demolition site.
A bench, comprising Justices B R Gavai and A G Masih, rejected the interlocutory application, stating that the prayer could not be granted without hearing the main matter.
The plea was filed as part of a contempt petition alleging illegal demolition of the Pir Haji Mangroli Shah Dargah between September 27 and 28, without prior notice and in violation of the Court’s stay order on demolitions.
A Special Leave Petition (SLP) challenging the Gujarat High Court’s refusal to stay the demolitions is pending before the Supreme Court.
Senior Advocate I H Syed, representing the applicant, submitted that the Urs had been conducted at the site for several years as it was an ancient protected monument.
He alleged that authorities denied permission this year, claiming there was no Dargah at the location.
Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta, appearing for the State of Gujarat, defended the demolition, asserting that it was conducted lawfully following due process and was not discriminatory.
He emphasized that unauthorised constructions across all religions, including temples, were removed.
Mehta further stated that no protected monument existed at the site, referencing an affidavit from the Department of Archaeology.
He clarified that no religious activities, including Hindu rituals, were permitted on the disputed land.
The Solicitor General reiterated that properties would not be allotted to third parties, and even the Somnath Temple Trust was denied permission.
Mehta also argued that the petitioner’s relief could not be granted through an interlocutory application filed in a contempt petition.
The applicant, Haji Mangrolisha, emphasized that Urs is a significant religious event attended by thousands of devotees annually.
The application stated that previous permissions had been granted for the event, but this year the District Collector prohibited entry under Section 163 of the Bombay Land Revenue Code (BNS).
The petition further highlighted that the Collector’s order restrained administrators from performing daily religious activities, including lighting incense and maintaining the premises
It also alleged the removal or destruction of historical inscriptions, gold ornaments, and other materials of religious and historical significance during the demolition.
Despite the applicant’s plea for urgent intervention due to the religious importance of the event, the apex court declined to grant relief, maintaining that the issue must be addressed as part of the main matter pending before the Court.