"Jaipur Walled City Could Lose UNESCO Tag": Rajasthan High Court Takes Suo Motu Cognizance Of Report On Degradation Of The Site

The Rajasthan High Court (Jaipur Bench) has taken suo motu cognizance of the alleged degradation of Jaipur's historic Walled City, warning that the city faces a serious risk of losing its UNESCO World Heritage Site status if effective remedial measures are not undertaken before December 2026.

Justice Pramil Kumar Mathur passed the order on September 26 in In Re: Global Identity of the Pink City, after taking note of a news report published in Rajasthan Patrika on September 24 concerning the preservation and protection of Jaipur's heritage. The Court also considered UNESCO's 2025 decision and related material concerning the conservation of the Jaipur World Heritage Site.

The Court observed that the Walled City, which was inscribed as a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 2019, was presently facing an "alarming degradation", referring to reports of illegal constructions, unauthorised alterations and encroachments in its core and buffer zones.

It noted that historically significant structures were allegedly being altered or demolished without adherence to conservation norms, affecting the architectural integrity that formed the basis of Jaipur's recognition as a World Heritage Site.

The Court further expressed concern about what it described as inadequate implementation of existing heritage regulations, noting that development activities were reportedly undertaken without proper heritage impact assessments and that enforcement mechanisms appeared weak or virtually nonexistent.

According to the Court, delays in implementing comprehensive heritage management plans and lack of coordination between authorities had contributed to the situation.

UNESCO Had Earlier Raised Concerns

The High Court noted that UNESCO's World Heritage Committee had also expressed concerns over the state of conservation of Jaipur's Walled City.

Referring to the Committee's 2025 decision, the Court noted that UNESCO had raised concerns over reports of demolition of historic houses within the World Heritage property, indicating inadequate enforcement of heritage protection measures. The Committee had also expressed concern over the operational capacity of the Heritage Cell.

The Court observed that UNESCO had flagged similar issues in 2023 and reiterated them in 2025.

It warned that unless adequate and effective remedial measures were undertaken before December 2026, Jaipur's Walled City ran a "serious risk" of forfeiting its UNESCO World Heritage recognition.

The Court noted that the loss of the designation could have consequences for Jaipur's tourism potential, local economy, global stature and cultural heritage.

It also pointed out that four sites had previously been removed from UNESCO's World Heritage List, citing uncontrolled urban development and irreversible loss of heritage attributes.

Court Treats Newspaper Report As Suo Motu PIL

Holding that preservation of Jaipur's heritage was a matter requiring judicial intervention, the Court treated the newspaper report as a suo motu writ petition under Rule 385-P of the Rajasthan High Court Rules, 1952.

Notice was issued to the State Government and various authorities, including the Urban Development and Housing Department, Local Self Department, Department of Archaeology and Museums, Jaipur Development Authority, Jaipur's municipal corporations and the Heritage Cell.

The Jaipur Development Authority and the municipal corporations were directed to conduct a survey of unauthorised and unregulated constructions allegedly causing damage to the Walled City and submit a report within two weeks.

Authorities Asked To Explain Heritage Safeguards

The Court directed the authorities to file a comprehensive affidavit within four weeks addressing, among other issues, the existing statutory framework for heritage protection, the manner in which those safeguards are implemented, and whether heritage impact assessments or conservation studies were undertaken before granting permissions for construction activities around heritage precincts.

They have also been asked to disclose the extent of unauthorised or unregulated construction during the last five years and the action taken against violators, including demolition, sealing, prosecution or penalties.

The authorities must further inform the Court about zoning and height restrictions, buffer zones, architectural control norms, coordination between heritage and municipal authorities, public consultations and the reasons for any failure to enforce existing planning and conservation regulations.

The Court has also asked whether accountability has been fixed upon officials responsible for permitting or failing to prevent construction activities detrimental to heritage preservation.

Action Plan, Accountability Sought

The respondents have been directed to place on record a comprehensive status report and an immediate and long-term, phase-wise action plan before the date of submission of the final report to UNESCO.

The Court also directed them to show cause why appropriate punitive action should not be initiated against officials or other persons found responsible for the alleged lapses.

Justice Mathur stressed that heritage, once lost, cannot be recreated, and observed that the existing administrative measures had so far proved inadequate to address the magnitude of the problem.

The Court said the issue required “stringent, time-bound, and enforceable directions” to prevent the damage from becoming irreversible.

The Court also referred to the constitutional obligation to protect cultural heritage under Article 49 and the fundamental duty under Article 51A(f) to value and preserve India's composite cultural heritage. It further noted that the right to cultural heritage is increasingly being recognised within the broader ambit of Article 21.

Court Suggests Citizen Participation In Heritage Conservation

The Court referred to the concept of "Social Audit" under the Madhya Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act, 1956, as an example of a statutory mechanism enabling residents to participate in urban planning, development and heritage conservation.

While clarifying that it would not enter the legislative domain, the Court said the State Government could examine whether an appropriate statutory framework or amendments to existing provisions were necessary to address the concerns.

The matter has been directed to be listed before the appropriate Bench having the roster within ten days.

The Court has also directed that the order be published in both digital and print media so that members of the public and heritage conservation experts can submit their inputs to the Registry.

Case title : In RE: Global Identity of the Pink City