[Patna Collectorate Building] SC Stays The Proposed Demolition Of The 18th Century Structure; Notice Issued To Bihar Government

Significantly, the Supreme Court has issued notice to the Bihar government (returnable within 2 weeks) while directing for status quo to be maintained till the plea against its demolition is decided by the Apex Court.

Notably, the petition filed in the Supreme Court has challenged the Patna High Court's ruling (delivered on 01^st September) which gave the State Government the green signal to demolish the alleged historical building.

The petitioner told the Supreme Court that the structure is an ancient monument having great historical importance and significance.

Notably, the historical building is over 200 years old and was built in 18^th Century by the Dutch traders. The Dutch used the same for storage of Shora (Saltpeter) and Opium and that over time, the significant portion of the structure stood damaged and is in a dilapidated condition.

Decision of the Patna HC (delivered on 01^st September 2020)

This matter was first pursued in the Patna High Court seeking protection of this structure built by the Dutch in the 18th Century.

In fact, the State Government has decided to set up a model of the existing structure (the historical building in question), adjacent to the new complex to be constructed in place thereof.

Meaning thereby, the present structure would be demolished so that a new collectorate complex could be built at that place instead.

In this context, the Indian National Trust For Art and Cultural Heritage had sought the Court's intervention in staying the demolition of the building.

The Bench comprising the Chief Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice S. Kumar had noted in its ruling that,

"In the year 1972, a survey was carried out by the Archaeological Survey of India whereby specific sites and monuments, after inspection, were declared to be Protected Monuments/Sites under the provisions of the Bihar Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites Remains and Art Treasures Act, 1976. At no point in time, the building in question, commonly termed as "Collectorate" was notified to be a Protected Site/Monument under any one of the statutes." (emphasis supplied)

The Court was of the view that to declare the site/monument having historical value/importance or significance is the duty cast upon bodies constituted by the Government under the relevant statutes.

Further, the Court noticed that even the Archaeological Survey of India had not intervened in declaring the monument as a historical one. Nor has a newly constituted Commission found it to be so.

The Court observed that the action of the Government cannot be said to be perverse, arbitrary, illegal or whimsical. Equally, the opinion of the experts cannot be said to be perverse, arbitrary, capricious or without any basis or foundation.

Most importantly, the Court had observed in its order,

"Yes, in history there may have been some significance attached to this complex, but that is for the use of storage of Opium and Saltpeter for commercial purpose. But then there is nothing more than that. The building has no significance, whatsoever, with art, culture or heritage or with that of any one of the movements of the struggle for freedom, leading to the independence of India. Equally, no celebrated person is associated with the same." (emphasis supplied)

Also, the Court had observed that even under the Development Act, twice the site was inspected, and on both the occasions it was observed that the structure has no importance from the point of view of history, architecture, art, aesthetics or culture.

In this context, the Court had noted,

"The experts have already expressed their opinion on this issue and, as such, we find no reason to interfere with the same, particularly when no mala fides stand alleged. The Court has to rely on the experts, and there is nothing perverse with this opinion." (emphasis supplied)

However, the Court had asked the State that rather than demolishing the building with the use of a bulldozer, it should endeavour removing, at least the pillars of the structure, in a planned and methodological manner.

Perhaps, as the Court noted, it would be ensuring that the very same material, i.e. bricks etc. can be protected, preserved and re-used for setting up a model of the existing building.

Lastly, the Court had recommended to the State Government to associate the petitioner only in the proposed establishment of the model of the old building, to be set up adjacent to the newly constructed Collectorate Building.

Click Here To Download Patna HC Order

[Read Order]