Read Time: 06 minutes

Synopsis

The Archeological Survey of India on Friday filed an affidavit before the Bombay High Court in a Public Interest Litigation plea that has challenged the Rs. 200 VIP fee at the Trimbakeshwar temple.

In its affidavit, the ASI submitted that the 2 trusts formed at the Trimbakeshwar temple without any authorization. The ASI informed the high court that when the ASI division of Aurangabad came across the Rs. 200 VIP entry banner, they had written a letter to the trust to stop collecting such fees. However, the trust did not remove the banner and continued collecting the VIP fee.

The affidavit further stated that the ASI had written a letter to the Chairman of the trust informing them that under Section 38(2)(c) of the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958 ASI reserved the right of access to the public to any protected monument and the fee charged if any. It also said that no other authority has the right to give access or charge any fee from the public.

The trust replied to the said letter stating that the trust did not put up any banner for the paid darshan/ special darshan in the temple premises and no fees are being charged for special darshan from the devotees/visitors and the Trust had not violated any provision of AMASR Act 1958. The reply also said that Rs. 200 is being collected as a donation from the devotees/visitors who are willing to pay such an amount and it is not compulsory for all the devotees.

The ASI cleared its stand while stating that it is the only authority empowered to take any decision with respect to the protected monuments. The affidavit read,

“I further say and submit that the Trimbakeshwar Temple, Nashik is a Centrally Protected Monument of Govt. of India under central legislation. Whereas the trusts are formed under the provisions of Maharashtra Public Trust Act. I therefore submit that it is only the central authority who is empowered to take any decision regarding protected monuments. The activities of trust of paid darshan therefore have no legal basis whatsoever. Provisions of AM & ASR Act 1958 and its rules 1959 and subsequent Amendment and Validation Act, 2010 are very clear in this regard.”

The petition has been filed by social worker Lalita Shinde who argued that the levy of Rs 200 discriminates between the rich and the poor. It states that various representations were made before the Archaeological Department and the ASI had written to the collector stating that such collection was in contravention of the Ancient Monument Preservation Act and was illegal. However, the collector did not take any action.

Case Title: Lalita Shinde vs ASI & Ors