Supreme Court Bars Further Constructions Or Additions To Ancient Religious Shrines In Delhi's Mehrauli

In the plea seeking protection of ancient religious structures in Delhi's Mehrauli, the Supreme Court today (February 28) directed the ASI to submit a detailed report on the original designs and subsequent alterations made to the structures The Court also clarified that there shall be no construction or additions to the present structures. 

The bench of CJI Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar was hearing a challenge against the Delhi High Court's order, which refused to pass specific directions for protecting centuries-old religious structures inside the Mehrauli Archaeological Park in Delhi, including the 13th-century Ashiq Allah Dargah (1317 AD) and Chillagah of Baba Farid.

In July, 2024 the Court had impleaded the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) and sought status reports from the ASI and the National Monument Authority (NMA). Notably, the court tagged another similar petition titled Himanshu Damle v. DDA with the main matter on May 13, 2024. 

Today, during the hearing, the Court inquired as to how much of the old part of the structures is unauthorised construction. The CJI verbally opined to "Take down the site plan of the place, so that there is no further encroachment" 

The Counsel for the ASI then submitted that a detailed report would be filed on the recent additions to the old structure: " We will find out which are those new structures which are coming under the new alternation centres" 

The bench, noting that the structure's present dome design has been altered as compared to its old dome, said "There is some alteration which has been done because the roof which is now there is the modern roof, it's not the old gumbad roof" 

To which ASI replied, "We will find out and file a comprehensive report".

Advocate Satyajit Sarna, appearing for Damle weighed in to add, " The reason why it is happening is because it's a living monument, worshipped by hundreds of people" 

Acknowledging the same, the CJI however pointed out that the issue pertains to encroachers setting up shops near the structure and making money out of it. 

The Counsel for the lead petitioner, Advocate Nizam Pasha submitted that the ASI's report was about the repairs done on the structure and there was no claim of encroachment of its surroundings. 

" Lordships that's not even the case of the ASI, what the ASI report says is that layers have been added in terms of whitewash, tiles, cement etc on the same structure, there is no encroachment, and there is no question of an additional structure being dug. It's not a monument which is protected, so it's not prohibited (the repairs)" 

Pasha further added that as per the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958 (AMASAR Act), if an ancient monument is not declared to be a protected monument, there is no prohibition on carrying out repairs upon it. The present structures in question are not protected monuments as such. 

CJI interjected to stress, "The more you argue this, the more difficult position you get into, because how did you carry out such large-scale renovations without permission etc?" 

CJI further asked even if the structures are not protected monuments, they would still be regulated by certain provisions of the Archeological Survey Act (AMASAR). 

The ASI then sought permission to file a detailed report on the status of the structures. The Court while granting the same, ordered that there would be no constructions or additions to the existing state structures. 

" The status report is filed by ASI. It is however stated that it is an interim report as the other facets, including original structure as it existed, has to be ascertained and verified...relist in the week commencing 28 April, ASI is given liberty to file a status report, liberty is also granted to the parties to file their objections/ submissions. 

We clarify that there will not be any construction, additions in the existing structure" 

Previously, the Top Court had directed the petitioners and authorities to make their representations to a court-constituted Religious Committee first. The decision taken by the Religious Committee was to be placed on record before its implementation.

Background

The plea before the high court raised the apprehension that the dargah and the chillagah in Mehrauli will be demolished soon by the Delhi Development Authority in view of the fact that a 600-year-old mosque, Masjid Akhonji, was demolished by the Delhi Development Authority in January, along with Madrasa Bahrul Uloom and various graves.

The High Court disposed of the matter after recording the government authority's undertaking that no protected monument or national monument would be demolished. In its order, the division bench led by Justice Manmohan also made observations regarding unauthorised encroachments and the need to balance the right to heritage and the right to breathe.

Challenging the High Court's order, an individual named Zameer Ahmed Jumlana moved to the apex court, arguing against the demolition of the historic structures.

Case Details : Zameer Ahmed Jumlana v. Delhi Development Authority (DDA) & Ors. | Diary No. 6711 of 2024

Click Here To Read/Download Order