Supreme Court Urges ASI to Supervise Mehrauli’s 12th-Century Monuments

The bench of Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice R. Mahadevan was hearing appeals against a Delhi High Court order that had declined to protect the structures from demolition by the Delhi Development Authority (DDA). Petitioners had argued that the monuments, which carry centuries-old cultural and religious significance, were wrongly treated as encroachments.

The Court, while disposing of the matter, observed: “The ASI should take under its consideration the supervision of the monuments in question in the matter of repair, renovation.”

During the hearing, the Bench pulled up the DDA for proposing demolition of structures with evident antiquity. “Why do you want to demolish it in the first place?” Justice Nagarathna asked DDA’s counsel.

The authority clarified that it was not against the dargah itself but was targeting unauthorised ancillary constructions in the vicinity. “The question which really arises is, how much of it is the protected monument and how much of it is the encroachment,” counsel submitted.

The Bench responded that no fresh construction or alteration should be allowed, but stressed the monument’s preservation. “That monument has to be preserved. We are only concerned with the monument,” Justice Nagarathna said, cautioning that heritage protection should not be misused to shield unauthorised construction.

Advocate Nizam Pasha, appearing for the appellants, argued that the structures date back to the 12th century and could not be dismissed as encroachments. He pointed out that while the High Court had remarked the dargah did not “look ancient” because of poor restoration, the ASI had subsequently confirmed its antiquity.

According to the ASI’s status report, an inscription on the tomb of Shaikh Shahibuddin records that it was built in 1317 AD. The agency also noted that the dargah and chillagah fall within the regulated 200-metre zone of Prithviraj Chauhan’s citadel under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act.

The ASI report further described the living cultural significance of the sites, observing that devotees light lamps at the Ashiq Allah Dargah for fulfilment of wishes and visit Baba Farid’s chillagah to ward off evil spirits.

The Court was also mindful of the larger issue of unauthorised structures around religious sites. Referring to its own earlier directions, Justice Nagarathna remarked, “You cannot have temples in the middle of the road or on footpaths. There should be no construction around this monument.”

DDA’s counsel assured the Bench that no steps would be taken without the approval of the Religious Committee, but the Court clarified that the dargah and chillagah could not be treated as mere encroachments to be sent before such a body. “How can a 12th-century monument be touched?” the Bench asked.

Noting that the writ petition in the High Court had been filed as a PIL to preserve Mehrauli’s monuments, the Supreme Court observed that while the structures were not notified as centrally protected monuments, their antiquity and cultural significance required safeguarding.

“In the circumstances, we dispose of these appeals by observing that the ASI should take under its consideration the supervision of the monuments in question in the matter of repair, renovation,” the Bench said.