New Delhi: The Supreme Court has issued contempt notice to the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) for not submitting a response on the conservation status of 173 notified heritage sites in Delhi and has summoned its Director General to personally appear in court next month.
In an order passed on March 16, uploaded this week, a bench of justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and N Kotiswar Singh said, “Notice is issued to the Director General of the Archaeological Survey of India to showcause, as to why, the court may not initiate proceedings for contempt against him. He shall be personally present before the court on the next date of listing along with his show-cause.”
The action follows an order by the court in February calling for status reports from multiple authorities managing notified heritage sites in the Capital.
According to a 2021 INTACH report , there are over 1,100 notified heritage sites and structures in Delhi. While 173 sites fall under the direct supervision and management of ASI, the remaining come under the control and management of the Delhi archaeology department, the New Delhi Municipal Council (NDMC) and the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD).
Also Read | SC orders mapping of heritage sites in Delhi
Taking note of this report, the court on February 2 directed all concerned agencies to provide details on the location, conservation status and maintenance of the monuments, with geo-mapping and photographs.
On March 16 all agencies except ASI filed responses. “The court takes strong exception to the deliberate violation of the order of this court…the number of monuments which are coming under the purview of ASI are 173. However, no affidavit has been filed on behalf of ASI,” the bench said, posting the matter on April 13.
The court was assisted by amicus curiae , senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, who presented a summary of reports filed before the court and highlighted gaps in compliance with the order of February 2.
The responses received from Delhi government, MCD and NDMC showed that the work of inspecting the sites had begun. Delhi government had inspected the 19 sites under its control but failed to provide latest photographs of the sites. MCD had identified 85 Grade-I structures of which only 62 had been surveyed. However, the civic body failed to provide information related to geo-mapping, local community involvement and budgetary constraints.
The bench said, “We make it clear that with regard to every monument, the location and geo-mapping along with the up-to-date photographs shall mandatorily be placed on record besides the details on all other issues indicated in our previous order of February 2.”
Also Read | ‘Heritage tag in danger’: Chandigarh moves SC over HC order on verandah construction
Sankaranarayanan said that NDMC too had 54 identified heritage sites but the agency had surveyed only two till date.
The court said, “We direct the NDMC to file a further affidavit giving details and the scheme under which they shall discharge their onus of overall supervision and coordination among all the other wings to ensure that the monuments are kept in the manner required.”
Once information from all agencies is submitted, the court said it will identify specific sites which should be prioritised for conservation and restoration. The court named heritage conservator and historian Swapna Liddle for this task and sought her presence on next hearing.
The court’s concern over the restoration of heritage sites has its genesis in a case filed by Rajeev Suri who raised the issue of encroachment of Gumti of Shaikh Ali – a Lodhi-era monument in Delhi’s Defence Colony – by residents who were operating the RWA office from inside the 17th century structure.
It was the top court’s initiative that led to removal of the encroachment, restoration of monument and awarding it the “protected monument” tag of the Delhi government under the Delhi Ancient and Historical Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 2004.
Following this, Suri filed an application through his lawyer, senior advocate Shikhil Suri, highlighting the dire need to conserve similar structures across Delhi .
His application brought the INTACH report , contained in seven volumes, on record. Three volumes are dedicated to areas of the Walled City, including the iconic Jama Masjid, Red Fort, and other structures situated near Begum Bagh, Daryaganj, Kashmere Gate and Mori Gate.
The fourth volume details heritage buildings of Outer Walled City, comprising Sadar Bazar, Pahar Ganj and Ajmeri Gate, while the fifth volume deals with Lutyens Delhi, that includes historic areas in Nizamuddin, India Gate, Jantar Mantar, Humayun’s Tomb, Lodhi Gardens, among others. The sixth and seventh volumes relate to heritage structures in South Delhi covering Tughlaqabad, Sultan Garhi, Lado Sarai, Sultanpur and Mehrauli.
The INTACH report dates these heritage structures under various time zones comprising pre-Mughal (pre-1526 A.D.), Mughal (1526 A.D. to early 18th century), late Mughal (early 18th century to 1857), early Colonial (1857 A.D. to early 20th century), and late Colonial period (early 20th century to 1947).