SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2019 Supreme(SC) 728

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Uday Umesh Lalit, Indira Banerjee, JJ.
SHIV DARSHAN SINGH – Petitioner
VERSUS
RAKESH TIWARI, DIRECTOR GENERAL, ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF INDIA (ASI) & ORS – Respondents/Contemnors
CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.697 OF 2017 IN CIVIL APPEAL NO.2431 OF 2006
Decided On : 09-07-2019

Advocates Appeared:
For Petitioner(s): Mr. Abhijit Sengupta, AOR
For Respondent(s): Mr. Annam D. N. Rao, AOR Mr. Jasmeet Singh, AOR Mr. Yoginder Handoo, AOR Sahil Tagotra, AOR Mr. Sonal Jain, AOR

IMPORTANT POINT
Contempt cannot be invoked on a matter not dealt with in the original judgment.

Headnote:Constitution of India - Article 129 and section 12, Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 - Construction within 100 meters of Jantar Mantar - Respondents taking up construction after sanction of building plan - High Court holding construction as illegal - NDMC withdrawing sanction - Challenged in writ petition which is pending - Contempt petitioner seeking demolition of building being in violation of Supreme Court judgment dated 16.01.2012 - Order of the High Court holding the construction in question illegal upheld - Court not dealing with status of the construction which was in existence on the day - Court only directed that authorities must not take any action or pass any order under Section 20A(3) and 20C of the Act except in accordance with the observations made in the Judgment - Held, demolition of the building cannot be directed in these proceedings. (Para 19)

       Facts of the case:

       This contempt petition, inter alia, seeks initiation of action against the Respondents for alleged violation of the judgment and order dated 16.01.2012 passed by this Court in Civil Appeal No.2431 of 2006 and also seeks orders directing Respondent Nos.4 and 5 to demolish the structure raised by them.

       Finding of the Court:

       Demolition of the building cannot be directed in these proceedings.

       Result: Contempt petition closed.

JUDGMENT

Uday Umesh Lalit, J.

1. This contempt petition, inter alia, seeks initiation of action against the Respondents for alleged violation of the judgment and order dated 16.01.2012 passed by this Court in Civil Appeal No.2431 of 2006 (‘the Judgment’, for short) and also seeks orders directing Respondent Nos.4 and 5 to demolish the structure raised by them.

2. While dealing with an ancient monument popularly known as Jantar Mantar in New Delhi, it was observed by this Court in the Judgment:-

“7. Jantar Mantar, New Delhi is one of the five unique observatories built between 1699 and 1743 by Maharaja Jai Singh (II) of Jaipur, who was a great Mathematician and Astronomer. The other observatories are at Jaipur, Ujjain, Varanasi and Mathura. Jantar Mantar, New Delhi, like other observatories has several instruments that can graph the path of the astronomical universe. There is a colossal Samrat Yantra at the periphery of Jantar Mantar. To the South of Samrat Yantra, there is an amazing instrument called Jai Prakash, which has two concave hemispherical structures used for determining the position of the Sun and celestial bodies. The other important yantras are Misra Yantra, Daksinovartti Bhitti Yantra, Karka Rasivalaya, Niyat Cakra, Rama Yantra, Brhat Samrat and Sasthamsa Yantra. Unfortunately, some of these yantras have been rendered unworkable or have become non-functional. One of the main reasons for this is the construction of multistoried structures which have come up in the vicinity of Jantar Mantar in the last 25 to 30 years.”

3. In exercise of power conferred by Section 3(1) of the Ancient Monuments Preservation Act, 1904 (7 of 1904), the Central Government had issued Notification dated 04.10.1956 which was published in the Gazette of India dated 13.10.1956, declaring Jantar Mantar, New Delhi to be a “protected monument.”

4. The Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) was enacted to provide for the preservation of ancient and historical monuments and archaeological sites and remains of national importance, for the regulation of archaeological excavations and for the protection of sculptures, carvings and other like objects. The term ‘ancient monument’ is defined by Section 2(a) of the Act as under:

“2(a) “ancient monument” means any structure, erection or monument, or any tumulus or place of interment, or any cave, rock, sculpture, inscription or monolith, which is of historical, archaeological or artistic interest and which has been in existence for not less than one hundred years, and includes –

(i) the remains of an ancient monument,

(ii) the site of an ancient monument,

(iii) such portion of land adjoining the site of an ancient monument as may be required for fencing or covering in or otherwise preserving such monument, and

(iv) the means of access to, and convenient inspection of an ancient monument.”

5. By virtue of Section 3 of the Act, all protected monuments declared under the erstwhile statutory regime, were deemed to be ancient monuments under the Act. Sub-Sections (1) and (2) of Section 38 of the Act are as under:

38. Power to make rules.- (1) The Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette and subject to the condition of previous publication, make rules for carrying out the purposes of this Act.

(2) In particular, and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing power, such rules may provide for all or any of the following matters, namely:?

(a) the prohibition or regulation by licensing or otherwise of mining, quarrying, excavating, blasting or any operation of a like nature near a protected monument or the construction of buildings on land adjoining such monument and the removal of unauthorised buildings;

(b) the grant of licences and permissions to make excavations for archaeological purposes in protected areas, the au





























































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top