Subhechcha Ganguly 
Muslims argue that the building is a fountain, while Hindus assert that it is a Shivlinga. The Supreme Court’s directives have made this region protected.On Saturday, the Varanasi district court rejected a request for a survey order of the whole Wazukhana within the Gyanvapi Mosque, excluding the structure found during a study ordered by the court in May 2022. Muslims argue that the building is a fountain, while Hindus assert that it is a Shivlinga. The Supreme Court’s directives have made this region protected.
In the Shringar Gauri-Gyavapi case, Rakhi Singh, plaintiff number 1, submitted the application on her behalf. Her attorneys Anupam Dwivedi, Saurabh Tiwari, and Manbahadur Singh filed the paperwork in the district court on August 29. The plaintiff’s attorney claimed in their plea that the Archaeological assessment of India was operating within the Gyanvapi and carrying out a scientific assessment without endangering the Gyanvapi building.In order to make a firm judgement, they suggested that a similar scientific investigation of the entire Wazukhana, excluding the disputed Shivlinga, be conducted. Advocate Saurabh Tiwari for the Hindu side said that District Judge AK Vishvesha rejected their request for a study of Gyanvapi’s whole Wazukhana, omitting the disputed Shivlinga.
On October 19, the court concluded its hearing on the subject. The Anjuman Intezamia Masajid Committee, which is in charge of overseeing the Gyanvapi Mosque, objected to the survey request. They claimed that a Supreme Court judgement made it illegal to conduct a survey inside the Wazukhana and other protected areas.On July 21, the Varanasi District Court had already ordered the Archaeological Survey of India to carry out a survey inside the Gyanvapi Mosque’s walled area, excluding the sealed section. An order from the Supreme Court in May of the previous year led to the implementation of the protective measures, including the Wazukhana.
