Sir, in October, 1991 reports were received indicating that the Uttar Pradesh Government had acquired certain land in the Ram Janam Bhoomi-Babri Masjid complex. Immediately a report was called from the State Government and I personally wrote to the Chief Minister on 15th October, 1991 drawing his attention to the various repercussions of the reported land acquisition and requesting him to take a fresh look at the desirability of the proposed, acquisition keeping in view particularly the pending Court cases and the sensitive nature of the controversy. Replies were received from the State Government and the Chief Minister himself. According to these replies, the land had been acquired for the purpose of development of tourism and providing amenities to the pilgrims at Ayodhya. The replies also assured that the State Government has taken the necessary steps for ensuring the safety of the Ram Janam Bhoomi-Babri Masjid structure. With a view to defusing the situation and finding a solution, the Prime Minister convened a meeting of the National Integration Council on 2nd November, 1991. The Supreme Court also passed an order on 15th November, 1991 taking note of the interim order passed by the High Court and also of the assurances given by the Chief Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh in the meeting of the National Integration Council held on 2nd November, 1991 which were taken as representation to the Court. From time to time, the Central Government's concern regarding the security of the Ram Janam Bhoomi-Babri Masjid structure was brought to the notice of the U.P. Chief Minister by me. I wrote to him on 13th November, 1991, 26th December, 1991 and 10th January, 1992 drawing his attention inter-alia to the. need to make adequate security arrangements for the Ram Janam Bhoomi-Babri Masjid structure and prevent any damage to it during the religious festivals when large crowds were expected to gather at Ayodhya, and requesting him also to restore some of the barricades which had reportedly been removed in the Ram Janam Bhoomi-Babri Masjid complex. The U.P. Chief Minister stated in one of his replies that the necessary security steps had been taken keeping in mind the local circumstances of the situation. In February, 1992, there were reports that the construction of a wall had been commenced by the Uttar Pradesh Government or its agencies in Ayodhya. I had written to the Chief Minister on 23rd February, 1992 stating that in the context of the tension prevailing on this issue, it may not be quite desirable to add to the apprehensions in the mind of the people and I had requested him to reconsider this step so as to avoid such a situation. According to the Chief Minister's reply dated 10th March, 1992, the construction of the wall is being undertaken in the context of the security arrangements for the disputed structure. He has stated that the State Government does not think that the construction of the wall will give rise to any apprehensions; on the contrary, it will strengthen the security of the disputed structure. As yet, no tension has come to light as a consequence of the construction of this wall. Immediately after reports were received regarding demolition of certain structures in the Ram Janam Bhoomi-Babri Masjid complex and the handing over of some land to the Ram Janam Bhoomi Nyas, the matter was immediately taken up with the State Government. On 22nd March, 1992 a wireless message was sent to the Chief Secretary, U.P., asking for a factual report the same night. He was also contacted by officers of the Home Ministry on telephone the same night as well as the next morning, that is, 23rd March, 1992. The Chief Secretary provided some preliminary information on telephone and assured that a full factual report will follow. Another detailed message was again sent by the Ministry asking for a comprehensive report. I also sent by FAX a letter dated 23rd March, 1992 to the Chief Minister. I drew the attention of the Chief Minister to the recent steps taken by the U.P. Government/in Ayodhya in the context of the Court orders and the assurances given by him in the NIC Meeting of 2nd November, 1991 and requested him to kindly consider whether these steps should not await the final outcome of the Court cases or the achievement of a negotiated settlement of the dispute. I appeal to all the Members that we must avoid emotional outbursts or statements which could further aggravate the problem. We must exhibit calm and restraint when discussing this matter so that an acceptable solution of the problem can be found. Submit