08 February 2024 Public Interest Litigation >> Constitution & Law Procedure   |   Environment Protection >> Environmental Law  

In a recent judgment, the Delhi High Court balanced competing interests of cultural heritage and environmental protection in a public interest litigation (PIL) concerning historical monuments in Mehrauli and Sanjay Van.

The PIL sought a stay order on the demolition of the Ashiq Allah Dargah, Baba Farid's chillagah, and other surrounding structures deemed to be of historical significance. Petitioners argued that these structures constituted an integral part of the cultural heritage and their demolition, even under the garb of encroachment removal, would be a violation of their right to preserve history.

The Respondents, presumably government agencies, undertook before the Court that no demolition would be carried out without due process and in accordance with the law. They further assured that protected monuments identified by the Central or State authorities would be safeguarded.

The Court, acknowledging the well-established principle that "life in its expanded horizons includes all that gives meaning to a man's life, including his culture and heritage," recognized the importance of preserving historical monuments. However, the Court also took judicial notice of the alarming levels of air pollution plaguing Delhi, highlighting the vital role green areas like Mehrauli and Sanjay Van play as the city's lungs.

Crucially, the Court examined the photographs annexed with the petition, which revealed evidence of recent unauthorized construction within the designated green area. This bolstered the Petitioners' concerns and underscored the need to address the issue of encroachment.

In its balanced judgment, the Court, while accepting the Respondents' assurances regarding the protection of declared monuments, directed them to take concrete steps to address the unauthorized constructions within the area. This approach ensures the preservation of cultural heritage while safeguarding the environment and upholding the sanctity of public land.

The decision serves as a precedent for reconciling competing interests in similar situations. It emphasizes the importance of striking a balance between cultural preservation and environmental protection, while adhering to the legal framework governing demolition and encroachment on public land.