The Centre said that the Ram Janambhoomi Nyas (a trust to promote construction of Ram Temple) had sought the return of excess land acquired in 1991 to original owners. In 2003, the apex court had ordered that the status quo be maintained with regard to the acquired 67 acre of land around the disputed site.

The Supreme Court Sunday cancelled the January 29 hearing in the politically sensitive Ram Janambhoomi-Babri Masjid land title dispute case as one member of the five-judge Constitution bench would not be available.

On Monday, Union Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad expressed his disapproval of the slow pace of hearing on the Ayodhya title suit in the Supreme Court, and appealed to for an “expeditious decision” as had been done in matters related to adultery and Sabarimala temple. Prasad said that he spoke as a citizen and not as the law minister.

“It is the wish of the people of the country that a Ram temple be built at Ayodhya. Our Prime Minister and our party president have also made it clear that this will take place within the constitutional framework,” Prasad told reporters in Patna.

“However, I would like to add something as a citizen of this country and not as the law minister. This matter has been pending for 70 years. It took 60 years for the Allahabad High Court to come out with its verdict on the title suit and the appeal against the same has been pending before the Supreme Court for 10 years,” Prasad, who was the counsel for one of the petitioners in the High Court, he said.

Meanwhile, Union Minister Ram Vilas Paswanclarified that there was no question of an ordinance on the construction of Ram temple at Ayodhya and that the government would wait for the Supreme Court’s verdict.

“I am happy that Prime Minister Modi has told Parliament that the government will wait for the Supreme Court’s verdict on Ram Mandir and act accordingly.