Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: AMASR in Tirthankara And Ors. vs Uoi on 29 November, 2021Matching Fragments
9. It is submitted that our constitution is transformative in nature and we, the citizens of India are not supposed to carry on the shameful and black spot of history on our head in the change of the circumstances with the change of the sovereign of the State. Plaintiffs have averred that Central Government is the owner and ASI has administrative control over the property in question. Hence, through this present suit relief for restoration of deities within the temple complex and also for issuance of direction to Central Government to frame (Neha Sharma) Page of 4 of 16 CJ01/(South) Saket Court/New Delhi TIRTHANKARA AND ORS. VS UOI scheme of administration and create a trust to manage Puja, Worship, Maintenance of Property in accordance with the provisions contained in sections 14, 16, 17, 18 and 19 of the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as "AMASR Act") has been sought.
21. Plaintiffs have averred in the plaint that section 16 of the AMASR Act permits to continue worship of the religion which maybe in consonance with the character of the building. Section 16 of the new act is on the same lines as the Section 13 of erstwhile the Ancient Monuments Preservation Act 1904 (VII Of 1904). Section 13 is reproduced herein "13. Protection of place of worship from misuse, pollution or desecration--
A place of worship or shrine maintained by the Government under this Act shall not be used for any purpose inconsistent with its character. (2) Where the Collector has, under section 4, purchased or taken a lease of any protected monument or has accepted a gift or bequest, or the Commissioner has, under the same section accepted the guardianship thereof, and such monument, or any part thereof, is periodically used for religious worship or observances by any community, the Collector shall make due provision for the protection such monument, or such part thereof, from pollution or desecration (a) by prohibiting the entry therein, except in accordance with condition prescribed with the concurrence of the persons in religious charge of the said monument or part thereof, of any person not entitled so to enter by the religious usages of the community by which the monument or part thereof is used, or (b) by taking such other action (Neha Sharma) Page of 10 of 16 CJ01/(South) Saket Court/New Delhi TIRTHANKARA AND ORS. VS UOI as he may think necessary in this behalf."
22. This provision has to be read in consonance with the Places of Worship Act, 1991. The contention of the plaintiffs that section 4(3)(a) of the Places of Worship Act, 1991 excludes an ancient and historical monument or an archaeological site or remains covered by the AMASR Act and hence, the present suit is not barred under the Places of Worship Act, 1991 would, in my opinion, frustrate the purpose of the act itself.
23. Section 4 (3)(a) has to be seen in the larger context of the Places of Worship Act. The object of the Act is to prohibit conversion of any place of worship and to provide for the maintenance of the religious character of any place of worship as it existed on the 15th day of August, 1947. By placing reliance on the Lok Sabha Debates, the purpose of enacting the law was observed in the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its judgment in Ayodhya Case;
28. It is an admitted fact that the suit property was declared a 'protected monument' in exercise of powers under section 3 of Ancient Monuments Preservation Act, 1904 vide Notification No. DL 387 Edu. Dated 16.01.1914 as per the Ancient Monuments Preservation ActVII of 1904 which was repealed when AMASR Act came into force. Section 3 of Ancient Monuments Preservation Act, 1904 is reproduced herein;
"3. Protected monuments-- (1) The 1 [Central Government] may, by notification in the 2 [Official Gazette], declare an ancient monument to be a protected monument within the meaning of this Act. (2) A copy of every notification published under sub (Neha Sharma) Page of 13 of 16 CJ01/(South) Saket Court/New Delhi TIRTHANKARA AND ORS. VS UOI section (1) shall be fixed up in a conspicuous place on or near the monument, together with an intimation that any objections to the issue of the notification received by 1 [Central Government] within one month from the date when it is so fixed up will be taken into consideration. (3) On the expiry of the said period of one month, the 1 [Central Government], after considering the objections, if any, shall confirm or withdraw the notification. (4) A notification published under this section shall, unless and until it is withdrawn, be conclusive evidence of the fact that the monument to which it relates is an ancient monument within the meaning of this Act."