Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

2.13 According to the petitioner, if the permission and the plan were to be read together, the same would indicate a disguised permission to totally demolish the Azamkhan Sarai and thereby erase from the map of Ahmedabad. Resultantly, the protection granted under the AMASR Act to the property situated within the prohibited area would become totally redundant.

2.14 According to the petitioner, the words repairs/ renovation/reconstruction figuring in the AMASR Act are of wide import. In the garb of renovation, the owner of a building cannot demolish the existing structure and raise a new one and at the same time the competent authority cannot grant permission for such reconstruction.

4. Stance of the respondent no.1 - Director General, Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi.

A) The Bhadra Fort was built in 1411 A.D. by Sultan Ahmedshah and is almost 600 years old. In the 17 th Century there was an extension of the Bhadra Fort known as the "Azamkhan Sarai". On 1st March, 1928, the Bhadra Tower and Three Gates at Ahmedabad were declared as Central Protected Monuments of National Importance by the Government Department vide Bombay Castle No.392 under the Ancient Monument Preservation Act, 1904 (VII of 1904). After the independence, the monuments are governed under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958 and Rules,1959. According to the AMASR (Amendment and Validation) Act, 2010 and the Notification published in the Government Gazette No.1764 dated 16 th June, 1992 an area upto 100 meters from the protected limits and further beyond it upto 200 meters near or adjoining the protected monuments has been declared to be prohibited and regulated area respectively. For the purpose of any construction/repair within the prohibited/regulated area of the centrally protected monument, permission from the Competent Authority (Government of Gujarat, Archaeology Department, Gandhinagar) is necessary in view of the provisions of the AMASR Act, 1958 and Rules 1959 including (Amendment and Validation Act, 2010).

B) Mr. Amin submits that the Competent Authority accorded permission dated 10th April, 2013 for construction only in that part of the existing Court building designated as "
Block-A falling within the regulated zone of the protected monument.
C) Mr. Amin submits that while according the necessary permission all the relevant provisions of the AMASR Act have been kept in mind and it could not be said that the impugned permission is in any manner violative of the provisions of the AMASR Act.

24. The above takes us to deal with the second contention canvassed by Mr. Trivedi on behalf of the petitioner.

According to Mr. Trivedi, although the Azamkhan Sarai has not been declared as a protected monument by the Central Government under the AMASR Act, 1958, yet the mere fact that it is more than 100 years' old, would make it an 'ancient monument' as defined in the Central Act.

25. We are not impressed by such submission of Mr. Trivedi for more than one reason. Section 2(j) of the AMASR Act, 1958 defines the term 'protected monument' as meaning 'an ancient monument which is declared to be of national importance by or under this Act'. Section 4 empowers the Central Government to declare an ancient monument to be of 'national importance'. It prescribes the procedure for such declaration. Once an ancient monument is declared to be of 'national importance', ipso facto it becomes a protected monument according to the definition of 'protected monument'. The Central Act deals with only monuments of 'national importance' which automatically stand as 'protected monument' under the Central Act. The State Legislature can enact a law dealing with those ancient or historical monuments which have not been declared by the Parliament to be of 'national importance'.