Supreme Court Assures Listing Plea To Withdraw Stay On New Suits Under Places Of Worship Act

The Supreme Court today took up a batch of pleas challenging the constitutional validity of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 (PoWA).

Advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain told a CJI Surya Kant led bench that his application for withdrawal of the stay order granted in December 2024 had not been listed. "My IA is not getting listed, I have pursued the Registry many times..", Jain told the bench.

Hearing this, CJI Kant assured that he would list the same. Arguing against Jain's application, court was told that this would lead to a mess. "My IA may be listed, it will not create a mess, it will solve the mess..", Jain responded before Court.

Notably, on December 12, 2024 Supreme Court had ordered that no trial court across India shall register any fresh suit filed by a community or its member claiming ownership of any existing religious place belonging to a different community till the next date of hearing in the matter before it.

A special bench of former Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna, Justices Sanjay Kumar, and KV Viswanathan had pointed out that no counter was on record on behalf of the Union government and allowed the Union 4 weeks' time to file the counter.

On court's order of no fresh suits, Advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain had then sought clarification. The CJI had then said that though fresh suits can be filed, it will not be registered.

In February last year, court had expressed concerns over new writ petitions being filed on PoWA and said that it was not inclined to issue notice in those leaving it open to the said writ petitioners to file intervention applications raising additional grounds in the pending writ petitions. "We're constrained to pass this order as there are a large number of writ petitions being filed...There has to be some deadline for filing of new petitions", former CJI Khanna had said.

A petition has been filed by Asaduddin Owaisi, the President of the All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM), seeking to enforce the provisions of Places of Worship Act. Also, the Akhil Bhartiya Sant Samiti approached the court to intervene in the pending pleas on the issue. The Indian National Congress also moved the court to intervene in the petitions challenging the validity of Sections 2, 3 and 4 of the PoW Act.

On 12 October 2022, the top court had formulated several questions of law that arise in the present batch of consideration. Court had highlighted that Sections 3 & 4 of the Act were the primary issues before it for consideration. The bench is seized with the batch of petitions which include the pleas of Dr. Subramanian Swamy, Advocate J Sai Deepak, Advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhayay, and Advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain challenging the legislation.

The Committee of Management Anjuman Intezamia Masjid, which oversees the Gyanvapi in Varanasi, has also approached the Supreme Court seeking to intervene in the batch of pleas. Its main contention is that the pleas against the PoW Act have been filed seeking to question its validity with rhetoric and they are rooted in communal claims. Therefore, it argues that such petitions cannot be entertained by the Supreme Court. The All India Muslim Personal Law Board is also an opposing party in the batch of petitions.

In 2021, in the matter of Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v. Union of India, Supreme Court Bench led by former Chief Justice Bobde had issued notice to the Ministry of Law and Justice, Ministry of Home Affairs and the Ministry of Culture. The Act, as alleged, takes away the power of Court and Religious Sects to restore their places of Worship. Challenge has been sought against Sections 2,3,4 Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 on the grounds of Article 14,15,21,25,26 and 29 of the Constitution.

“Centre by making the impugned Act has created arbitrary irrational retrospective cutoff date, declared that character of places of worship-pilgrimage shall be maintained as it was on 15.8.1947 and no suit or proceeding shall lie in Court in respect of disputes against encroachment done by fundamentalist barbaric invaders and law breakers and such proceeding shall stand abated. If suit/appeal/proceeding filed on ground that conversion of place of worship and pilgrimage has taken place after 15.8.1947 and before 18.9.1991, that shall be disposed off in terms of S.4(1)”, the plea stated.

Upadhyay has contended that the Centre has barred the remedies against illegal encroachment on places of worship and pilgrimages as no Hindu, Buddhist or Sikh can file any suit or approach High Court under Article 226 for restoration of his place of worship. It is further submitted that by enacting such law, the legislature has taken away the power of Judicial Review from the Courts, which is the Basic Structure of the Constitution.

Case Title: Ashwini Upadhyay Vs UOI

Bench: CJI Kant, Justice Bagchi and Justice Pancholi

Hearing Date: February 12, 2026