Taking a soft stand on the Congress, Thackeray cornered Prime Minister Narendra Modi for accusing the former of stalling the Ram Janmbhoomi case in the Supreme Court.
"They (BJP) say Congress comes in between when the Ram Mandir issue comes up. Just because Congress comes in the middle, people punished them by taking away the majority and giving you the power. However, we don't see any Ram Mandir built by you so far," he said.
On Saturday, Prime Minister Modi, while addressing the BJP national council meeting at Ramlila Maidan in New Delhi, had accused the Congress of creating obstacles in the resolution of the Ayodhya issue. Furthermore, the Prime Minister said the Congress did not want a solution in the matter.
Arguments from politicos came days after the Supreme Court fixed January 29 as the next date of hearing in the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute after Justice UU Lalit recused himself from hearing the case.
A five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court, headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, and comprising of Justice SA Bobde, Justice NV Ramana, Justice UU Lalit and Justice DY Chandrachud, at the outset said that only date and schedule will be decided.
Justice UU Lalit recused himself from hearing the case after advocate Rajeev Dhavan, appearing for Muslim parties, pointed out that Justice Lalit had appeared for Kalyan Singh in a related case.
The Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute case has been pending before the apex court for last eight years. Parties in the case and various right-wing organisations have been asking for an early or day-to-day hearing for a long time.
Last year, the top court had refused to grant an urgent hearing, saying the court had "other priorities" and posted the matter for hearing in the first week of January this year before the "appropriate bench".
There are as many as 14 appeals pending in the apex court against the 2010 Allahabad High Court judgement, delivered in four civil suits. The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court in its September 30, 2010, verdict ordered that the disputed site be divided into three parts -- one for deity (Ramlala Virajmaan), another for Nirmohi Akhara - a Hindu sect - and a third one, to the original litigant in the case for the Muslims.