"You will clean in 2 hrs if a dignitary comes", SC pulls up MCD for poor upkeep of Lodhi Era 'Gumti of Shaikh Ali'

The Supreme Court has pulled up the Municipal Corporation of Delhi for not following its orders regarding a Gumti, belonging to the Lodhi era in Delhi's Defence Colony.

"You will clean it in two hours if a dignitary is coming", said a bench of Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and SVN Bhatti referring to non-maintenance of cleanliness around the Lodhi-era "Gumti of Shaikh Ali".

Court further question if there was any ego issue. Accordingly, the bench went on to direct the MCD to depute a senior official to monitor the situation on a day-to-day basis and to share the details of the officer with Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan who has been appointed court commissioner in the matter.

As the matter was taken up, the bench observed that there was too much of a communication gap between the Court and the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD). It had then directed the Commissioner of the MCD to be personally present in the Court at 3.00 p.m. so that whatever order the Court passes is in his presence so that it can taken in the right spirit.

"We have been constrained to pass this order as we have been giving sufficient leverage and latitude to the MCD to come clean by showing its bonafide but we find that our hopes have been dashed by the conduct and the stand taken by the MCD", the bench had further said.

The matter has now been posted for September 18, 2025 and a report has been called for from MCD on officers responsible for disobeying its orders and the action taken in this regard.

Court was hearing a plea filed by Defence Colony resident Rajeev Suri who has sought that the Gumti be declared a protected monument. Last year, Supreme Court had directed the CBI to conduct a preliminary enquiry into the Gumti, which came to be occupied by Defence Colony Residents Welfare Association to run its office since 1963-64.

A bench of Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Ujjal Bhuyan also asked the central agency to ascertain how and under what circumstances, when the central government and ASI had initially recommended that the Gumti be declared a protected monument, only on the purported basis of alterations/additions having been made by the DCWA (Defence Colony Welfare Association) and the sole objection submitted by it, both ASI and the Central Government changed their stands.

The court issued its directions on a petition filed by Rajeev Suri against the Delhi High Court's order of February 20, 2019, which had dismissed his plea for protection of the 'Gumti'.

It is to be noted that on February 09, 2004, by a Gazette Notification, the central government (Union of India) gave notice of its intention under Section 4(1)2 of the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958 to declare the Gumti to be of national importance. Objections to such declaration were sought within a period of two months. On April 07, 2004, Defence Colony Welfare Association objected to the proposal. On May 15, 2004, the Director General’s office sought the Superintending Archaeologist’s comments on the DCWA’s objections. On June 29, 2004, the Superintending Archaeologist reverted to the Director General, ASI, stating that the Gumti has been in the DCWA’s occupation and additions and alterations have been made over time, which may be considered before issuing the confirmatory notification under the Act.

Sometime, in the year 2008, as noted in the Impugned Judgment, the Central Government decided that the Gumti could not be declared as a monument of national importance as major additions/alterations had been made by the DCWA who had been using it as its office leading to the Gumti losing its originality, the court had noted. "We are surprised at the turn of events. In the year 2004 the competent body to recommend declaration of a structure as a monument of national importance viz. ASI favoured so doing, based on the Superintending Archaeologist’s comments supra, but later the ASI reports that as alterations had been made by the DCWA while occupying the structure, the Gumti had lost its originality," the bench had further said.

From the note accompanying the letter of February 15, 2008 addressed to the Superintending Archaeologist by the Director (Monuments), the court had found it emerged that the Secretary, Culture had already previously noted “It however not be feasible for the ASI to protect it as a centrally protected monument.”

This the Supreme Court found to be creating doubt on the bona fides of the ASI as also the Central Government, insofar as proper processing of the original proposal was concerned.

Case Title: RAJEEV SURI vs. ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF INDIA & ORS.

Hearing Date: September 4, 2025

Bench: Justices Amanullah and Bhatti