Orissa High Court
The Indian National Trust For Arts vs The Government Of Orissa And .... ... on 15 March, 2022
Author: R. K. Pattanaik
Bench: R. K. Pattanaik
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.2034 of 2007
The Indian National Trust for Arts .... Petitioner
and Cultural Heritage,
Bhubaneswar
M/s. G. P. Mohanty and associates, Advocates
-versus-
The Government of Orissa and .... Opposite Parties
others
Mr. P. K. Parhi, ASGI, for ASI, Mr. Chandrakanta Pradhan,
Senior Panel Counsel, Government of India and
Mr. Debakanta Mohanty, AGA
CORAM:
THE CHIEF JUSTICE
JUSTICE R. K. PATTANAIK
ORDER
15.03.2022 Order No.
26. 1. An affidavit dated 24th December, 2021 has been filed by Mr. Arun Malik, presently working as Superintending Archaeologist with the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), Bhubaneswar Circle, Bhubaneswar. Inter alia, an important point made in the affidavit is that the protected area in terms of the Gazette Notification dated 13th November, 1950 is to an extent of Ac. 562.681. The said Notification was issued under the Ancient Monuments Preservation Act, 1904 which was subsequently reenacted as the Archaeological Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958 (AMASR Act) and further amended by the AMASR (Amendment & Validation) Act, 2010. The site in question is a Centrally Protected Monument. It is Page 1 of 3 accordingly submitted that this entire area requires to be demarcated and a boundary wall constructed consistent with such demarcation. It is stated that what has so far been demarcated is the area of Sisupalgarh (which is only 0.775 decimals) whereas the total area to be demarcated and protected from encroachment is much larger.
2. The ASI has enclosed with its affidavit a copy of the site plan indicating the protected area, the photographs showing the ancient structures located in the protected area as well as the rampant construction of illegal buildings for the removal of which, according to ASI, it has been constantly writing to the State Government. It is urged in the affidavit that the authorities are required to exercised their powers under Sections 19(1) and 19 (2) AMASR Act to stop the construction of buildings within the protected area. While according to the ASI, it has taken effective steps for constructing a boundary wall around the protected area at an estimated cost of Rs.81,03,971/-, the work itself can be taken up and completed "only after removal of encroachments found within the protected area."
3. Mr. Debakanta Mohanty, learned Additional Government Advocate, states that a copy of the above affidavit has not yet been served on State Government. Learned ASI states that he will do so today itself.
4. Mr. Mohanty seeks and is granted four weeks' time to respond to the above affidavit. The State Government must come up with Page 2 of 3 a detailed plan on how it proposes to go about enforcing the aforementioned Gazette Notification by removing encroachments and facilitating the construction of a boundary wall around the entire demarcated area of Ac. 562.681, which has been notified as a Centrally Protected Monument.
5. List on 16th May, 2022.
(Dr. S. Muralidhar) Chief Justice (R. K. Pattanaik ) Judge M. Panda Page 3 of 3