PIL Opposing Demolition Of Lucknow Family Court Building, Seeking Heritage Status: Allahabad High Court Seeks UOI, HC Stand

The Allahabad High Court has called for a short counter from the High Court administration as well as the Union of India in response to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) plea challenging the auction for the demolition of the main building of the Family Court in Lucknow. Filed by social activist Gautam Bharti, the PIL contends that the Family Court building, also known as “Chandi Wali Baradari”, is an old heritage structure of historical importance, serving as a living example of the rich cultural and archaeological legacy of Awadh/Lucknow. The plea asserts that, rather than preserving the monument/building, the respondents are 'adamant' about demolishing it to construct 12 new courtrooms for the Family Court, even though such construction cannot proceed without proper adherence to Heritage Assessment, as mandated under the National Building Code, 2016. This is particularly critical, the PIL adds, given the building's historical significance and its centuries-old existence. It further submits that, according to nearby residents and respected members of society, excavation activities at the Chandi Wali Baradari/building revealed machines, bricks, and structures from both the Mughal and British eras. These findings, the plea states, are no less than a treasure, underscoring the need for protection and conservation of the building rather than its demolition. “...despite protecting and preserving the building, the respondents are acting in an arbitrary and illegal manner by attempting to demolish the structure, which holds great historical and cultural significance. If demolished, it would cause irreparable loss and injury to the cultural enrichment of society and would also be detrimental to the national interest,” the PIL plea submits. Moreover, the plea argues that the authorities have failed to furnish any survey report on the structural stability of the building, even though the planned demolition is being justified based on its allegedly dilapidated condition. “There is major apprehension that the said demolition order has been passed just to construct new and advanced courtrooms over the building without proper assessment of whether the building needs protection, conservation, or is indeed dilapidated,” the plea submits. The PIL ple further contends that the demolition plan should not rest solely on the wisdom of officials or government organisations. As a historical monument, the building's fate warrants public consultation, which is an essential step that, according to the PIL, has been ignored in this case. Importantly, the PIL plea adds that the Family Court building is notified as a Regulated Area under Regulation 5.2.2 of the Heritage Bye-laws for the Protected Monuments Kaisarbagh Gates, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, which have been framed by the Government of India. It argues that the respondents have miserably failed to adhere to the provisions of the Act, which, under Section 20C, prescribes the procedure to be followed in cases of construction, reconstruction, repair, or renovation in a Regulated Area under the Act. It also claims that the acts of the respondents are in complete violation of the procedures laid down under “The Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains (Framing of Heritage Bye-laws and Other Functions of the Competent Authority) Rules, 2011. “…instead of protecting the fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 29 of the Constitution of India, the State, by proceeding with the demolition, is severely infringing the fundamental rights of the citizens of the country, which is totally against the spirit of the Constitution of India,” the PIL plea states. Against this backdrop, it prays quashing of the auction for demolition of the Main building of the Family Court, Lucknow and to command the Respondents to declare the Main building of the Family Court, Lucknow, Nazarat Building, Administrative Building, Copying Department, Record Room Building, All Residences of the Fourth Class Employees, All four court rooms with chamber and balcony and 37 chambers of Advocates as monument of national importance under Section 4 of the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958 and give it status of 'protected monument'.Hearing the plea on June 10, a bench of Justice Saurabh Lavania and Justice Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi directed the respondents to explain the expression "Family Court" indicated in Para 5.2.2 under the heading of "Regulated Area" of the Heritage Bye-laws for the Protected Monuments Kaisarbagh Gates, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh.Advocate Amrendra Nath Tripathi appeared for the petitionerDeputy Solicitor General of India Suryabhan Pandey, assisted by Advocate Varun Pandey and Advocates Gaurav Mehrotra, Vijay Dixit, appeared for the State-respondents

PIL Opposing Demolition Of Lucknow Family Court Building, Seeking Heritage Status: Allahabad High Court Seeks UOI, HC Stand

Sparsh Upadhyay

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Sparsh Upadhyay

PIL Opposing Demolition Of Lucknow Family Court Building, Seeking Heritage Status: Allahabad High Court Seeks UOI, HC Stand

Sparsh Upadhyay

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Sparsh Upadhyay

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers