Supreme Court Seeks ASI Response On Plea To Allow Urs, Namaz At Hazrat Sheikh Muhammad Ghaus Tomb In Gwalior

The Supreme Court on Monday heard a plea challenging a Madhya Pradesh High Court order which upheld the Archaeological Survey of India's refusal to allow the performance of Urs and Namaz at the tomb of Hazrat Sheikh Muhammad Ghaus in Gwalior, a centrally protected monument.

A bench of Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan granted time to ASI and Union of India to file a counter affidavit responding to a Special Leave Petition against the MP High Court's order.

Advocate Manan Mishra, appearing for the petitioner, told the Court that the date for holding Urs had already passed but requested the court to decide the matter as it will be relevant in the future.

He also highlighted that permission had recently been granted for a music festival within the same premises. Mishra argued that the refusal to permit Urs and Namaz was arbitrary and said the organisers could give an undertaking that they would not cause any damage to the monument.

Additional Solicitor General KM Nataraj, appearing for the Union of India and the ASI, said the issue related to 2024 and had now become academic because the relevant date had passed.

He also opposed the comparison with other events, stating that cultural functions held elsewhere could not be equated with the claim made by the petitioner. “We do not want to create a religious right in a particular protected monument,” he said.

The Court indicated that it will dispose of the case allowing the petitioner to make a fresh application for permission which the ASI will consider in accordance with law. “They can file a fresh representation for next year let it be considered in accordance with law”, Justice Nagarathna said.

Mishra requested that such consideration should take place without being influenced by the High Court judgment. He also pointed out that no counter affidavit had yet been filed and requested the court to direct the respondents to at least file a counter before the court disposes of the case.

Accepting Mishra's request, the Court adjourned the matter after the Additional Solicitor General sought time to file a counter affidavit on behalf of the Union of India and ASI.

Background

The dispute concerns the tomb of Hazrat Sheikh Muhammad Ghaus in Gwalior, which has been declared a monument of national importance and is maintained by the Archaeological Survey of India. The petitioner, claiming to be the Sajjada Nashin and legal heir of Sheikh Muhammad Ghaus,. claims that Urs and other religious activities have been held at the dargah for over 400 years.

On March 14, 2024, the ASI rejected the petitioner's application seeking permission to organise Urs at the site. It stated that the premises are a protected monument under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958 and that under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Rules, 1959 the monument can remain open only from sunrise to sunset. The ASI also referred to Section 30 of the 1958 Act and Rule 8 of the 1959 Rules and said that such activities would be punishable with imprisonment of up to two years and a fine of ₹1 lakh.

The petitioner then approached the Madhya Pradesh High Court challenging the refusal. He argued that Urs and Namaz had been performed at the site for centuries and that the practice was a long-standing religious custom.

The Union of India opposed the petition and said the monument had been declared a national monument through a Gazette notification dated January 23, 1962. It also referred to earlier civil litigation in which claims of ownership over the monument by members of the petitioner's family were rejected.

A civil suit filed by Peerjada Syed Ali Hasan claiming ownership of the tomb was dismissed on September 28, 1995. A first appeal filed by his legal representatives was dismissed on April 12, 2004. Another civil suit filed by Syed Muhammad Hasan was dismissed on July 23, 1999 and a civil revision against that decision was rejected by the High Court on March 5, 2002. A second appeal filed against the 2004 judgment was dismissed on January 13, 2015 and a review petition was also rejected on March 30, 2016. The Union stated that the dispute had also reached the Supreme Court earlier, where the claim was unsuccessful.

The Union also referred to directions issued in a PIL initiated before the High Court. On February 20, 2014, the Court directed the ASI and the Gwalior Municipal Corporation to identify encroachments within the protected monument area and remove them. It also directed that Urs or other activities should not be held without prior permission from the ASI and asked the district administration to assist in preventing illegal activities within the monument area.

The High Court dismissed the petition and upheld the ASI's refusal. It held that the tomb had been declared a monument of national importance under Section 4(3) of the 1958 Act and must be preserved in accordance with the law. The Court observed that allowing the proposed activities could lead to installation of tents, lights and other structures that might cause damage or pollution to the monument.

It also held that the monument did not fall within the category of a place of worship or shrine and therefore could not be used for religious activities. The Court further noted that the petitioner had not challenged the ASI's letter rejecting the request for permission and found that material facts about earlier litigation had been concealed.

Thus, the petitioner filed the present SLP.

Case no. – SLP(C) No. 25083/2025

Case Title – Sabla Hasan v. Union of India