Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
M. NAGAPRASANNA
Denis Crasta S/o Late Elias Crasta – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. context of property ownership and approval for construction (Para 1 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. issuance of stop notice by archaeological survey (Para 5) |
| 3. arguments regarding jurisdiction and compliance with regulations (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. legal provisions governing construction near protected monuments. (Para 9) |
| 5. interpretation of prohibition and regulation in construction near monuments (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 6. state obligations under article 49 and consequences for officials (Para 13 , 14) |
| 7. final order and directions given by the court (Para 15) |
ORDER :
M. NAGAPRASANNA, J.
The petitioner calls in question an order dated 28-01-2025 passed by the Regional Director, National Monuments Authority, Government of India, Bengaluru declining to grant permission and directing to stop construction of the residential house in the schedule property.
2. Heard Sri Pundikai Ishwara Bhat, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri Ajay Prabhu, learned Central Government Panel Counsel appearing for respondents 1 and 2, Sri Shamanth Naik, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent No.3 and Sri Harish Bhandary, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.4.
3. Facts in brief, ger
The court affirmed that new constructions within prohibited areas near protected monuments violate statutory provisions, emphasizing the need for preservation of historical sites over individual cons....
The court affirmed the priority of public interest in preserving historical monuments over private construction rights, ruling unauthorized constructions after necessary prohibitions as invalid.
(1) Construction for the purpose of providing basic and essential amenities for convenience of devotees at large within prohibited area of Shree Jagannath Temple complex in Puri is permissible.(2) Fr....
The repair works and installation of doors in a protected area constituted 'operation of like nature' and material alteration of the building, attracting the provisions of Section 19 of the Act of 19....
A court may grant leave to institute a suit without notice under Section 80(2) CPC if urgent relief is necessary, and the appointment of an Advocate Commissioner for local investigation is valid and ....
Actions would be taken to verify that the existing structure is in accordance with the existing Development Permission and only thereafter, Building Usage Permission would be granted.
The Archaeological Survey of India must adhere to natural justice principles and provide an opportunity for hearing before taking enforcement actions against properties in regulatory zones.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
