Pro-Mandir groups, Shiv Sena express dismay as Supreme Court's Ayodhya hearing gets pushed to Jan 29. Read here

After the 5-judge Constitution bench decided that the Ayodhya case will next be taken up on January 29, scores of groups involved in the case, directly and indirectly, have reacted to it.

Here are the reactions from the prominent groups who are for and against building the Ram Mandir.

Vishnu Shankar Jain, VHP counsel: "They are saying they are ready to hear the matter but they will hear the matter after 2019 election

Arvind Sawant, MP from Shiv Sena: "We were discussing the matter as there is complete delay from the court. This is unfortunate. Uddhav Thackeray has been demanding quick resolution on the Ram Mandir. He had been criticising the 'Mandir Wahi Banayenge par taarik nahi batayenge'. The Ram Mandir issue is going the taarik pe taarik way through the court."

Former BJP MP Vinay Katiyar:  "Everyone is eager to build the Ram Mandir. Every day hearing is a necessity. We can't delay it any further."

Mahant Dharamadas, litigant, from the Ram Janmabhoomi Nirman Samiti: "This order today, there was no need to extend the date. If this continues, the case will not be over in years."

Mahendar Dinendra Das (Nirmohi Akhada Chief), litigant: "We should not make it a political issue, I have faith in Lord Ram, he will pave the way for temple construction. I am saying since ages that VHP is trying to make it a political issue. Whoever wants to build Ram temple can join us."

Ram Vilas Vedanti from the Ramjanmabhoomi Nyas: "We are not accepting it. This is not done. Kapil Sibal said bring Ram Mandir case after 2019 election. The SC is going as per Kapil Sibal's way (sic). This is a conspiracy through Congress..."

Zafaryab jilani, convener, Babri Masjid Action Committee: "Lalit sahab said that it will not be suitable for him to be on this case.. Muslims have faith so be it any judge we know they will be impartial. 

Iqbal Ansari , litigant: "Whatever the SC decided must be followed, this is the Constitution of the country. The court does not work on Hindu and Muslim."

Haji Mehboob: "The issue should be left to the people of Ayodhya. Or else the case will keep dragging."

READ | Supreme Court's Ayodhya Hearing Delayed To Jan 29 After Justice UU Lalit Recuses Himself, New Constitution Bench Likely To Be Constituted

The Ayodhya case will next be taken up on January 29, after proceedings were hardly able to get off the ground during the much-awaited hearing on Thursday, on account of Justice UU Lalit having earlier appeared as a lawyer in a related case.

The Chief Justice of India, who is heading the 5-judge Constitution bench that has been constituted to hear the politically sensitive title dispute, clarified right at the start of proceedings that only a date and schedule were to be determined in the Thursday hearing.

Speaking immediately after, Rajeev Dhawan, senior counsel for one of the petitioners, highlighted that Justice UU Lalit had at one point been a lawyer in the associated Kalyan Singh case. Dhawan said, however, that he has no objection to Justice Lalit being on the bench but wanted to bring it to their notice.

To this, Harish Salve, appearing for the plaintiff Ram Lalla, said, "Justice UU Lalit on the bench doesn’t impact the case because the case going on regarding Kalyan Singh was a criminal case regarding the Babri demolition and not on the merits of the Allahabad HC order."

However, Justice Lalit at this point decided to recuse himself from the case. 

CJI Gogoi then said, "Rajeev Dhawan has brought to our notice that Justice Lalit had appeared in a criminal case regarding the same issue on 1997. Although he has raised no objection, the final decision rests with the judge." He then gave a background into the decision to constitute a 5-judge bench, saying that it was taken on an administrative side under the powers of the CJI.

The other hurdle involved translation of the copious amount of documentary material required by the bench. The CJI quantified these as follows: "A total of 88 witnesses have been examined. Documents run up to 13886 pages. Allahabad HC judgment runs into 4304 pages. Documents lying in 15 sealed trunks."

All Eyes On Supreme Court As 5-judge Constitution Bench Takes Up Ayodhya Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid Case: LIVE Updates And All You Need To Know Here