Are Philatelic Exhibits Like Postage Stamps 'Antiquities' Under Antiquities And Art Treasures Act? Delhi High Court Answers

The Delhi High Court has held that philatelic exhibits of postage stamps, fiscal stamps, envelopes, stamp papers and other such documents, are "antiquities" within the meaning of the Antiquities and Art Treasures Act, 1972.

Noting that philately is a hobby of the "discerning connoisseur" who appreciates the intrinsic value of vintage stamps and other such documents, Justice C Hari Shankar observed that such exhibits are articles, objects or things of historical interest within the meaning of section 2(1)(a)(I)(iv) of the Act.

The said provision defines antiquity as any article, object or thing of historical interest.

"In fact, though a select group of collectors may take the trouble to collect such exhibits, their inherent and intrinsic historical value far transcends the covers of the albums that such collectors may maintain. They are, therefore, ex facie ―antiquities within the meaning of Section 2(1) (a)(I)(iv)," the court said.

The court said the expression "historical interest" under the said provision would encompass, within its wide scope, all items which serve as "indicia and indicators of the times that have gone and never to return."

"Most vintage items, per se, are items of 'historical interest'. History is but a hark back to posterity, and an effort to appreciate and assimilate, years, decades or centuries later, the lives, trials and tribulations of past times. Items which date back to such past times are, therefore, intrinsically of 'historical interest'," the court observed.

Furthermore, Justice Shankar observed that to call the submission — that philatelic exhibits including postages and revenue stamps, stamp papers and other such documents of over a century's vintage are not items of historical interest — as preposterous, cannot be regarded as an exaggeration.

"Such exhibits are of immense historical and, to an extent, even of scientific, interest – and, for that matter, even of historical value. Philately is a hobby of the discerning connoisseur, who appreciates the intrinsic value of vintage stamps and other such documents," the court said.

It added: "The very fact that international exhibitions are held for such connoisseurs of the art, indicates, clearly, that philatelic exhibits are of great value. A postage stamp of 1900 vintage which, at that time, may have been used and thrown away would, if found a hundred years later, have increased its value a thousand-fold. The historical importance of such exhibits cannot, either, be undermined in any manner."

The court further observed that philatelic exhibits would be antiquities even within the meaning of Section 2(1)(a)(II).

The said provision covers any manuscript, record or other documents which is of scientific, historical, literary or aesthetic value and which has been in existence for not less than 75 years.

It was observed that while the word "manuscript" refers etymologically and legally to a written document, the expression "record" is of wider amplitude.

The court said that the only commonality between the words manuscript and record is that they are both documents. Thus, it was added that the expression "other documents", as employed in the provision had to be accorded full scope, and that its ambit cannot be narrowed by applying "interpretative calisthenics."

While holding that philatelic exhibits are antiquities within the meaning of the Act, the court added that the sequitur to the decision would be that the 1999 Guidelines issued for "organising exhibitions abroad for lending art objects to private and public museums and receiving exhibitions from abroad" would also apply to such exhibits.

The court gave the ruling while dismissing a 2008 plea moved by one Ajay Kumar Mittal, a philatelist and a member of the Philatelic Congress of India (PCI), who claimed to own various philatelic collections and having exhibited the same at various philatelic exhibitions.

Mittal had approached the court seeking directions to prohibit the authorities from taking any steps to prevent him from taking the said exhibits to Tel Aviv for World Stamp Championship Israel, 2008. It also sought directions that the Temporary Export Permit be issued to him.

Mittal also sought directions that the philatelic material sought to be taken abroad temporarily for the World Stamp Championship, being more than 75 to 100 years old, are not the 'Art Objects' and 'Antiquity' under the definition of section 2(1)(a) and (b] of the Act.

Most of the prayers in the writ petitions were rendered infructuous since the case filed in 2008 remained undecided till Friday.

Title: AJAY KUMAR MITTAL v. UOI & ORS

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 1042

Click Here To Read Order