SC issues contempt notice to ASI chief over non-compliance on Delhi heritage sites

The Supreme Court of India has issued a contempt notice to Yadubir Singh Rawat, the Director General of the Archaeological Survey of India for failing to comply with its directions on the conservation status of 173 protected heritage sites in Delhi.

A Bench of Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and N. Kotiswar Singh took “strong exception” to what it termed a deliberate violation of its earlier order, and directed the ASI chief to personally appear before the court on the next date of hearing.

“The court takes strong exception to the deliberate violation of the order… notice is issued… to show cause why contempt proceedings should not be initiated,” the Bench said.

Court finds gaps in compliance

The court said only a general statement had been submitted regarding compliance, without detailed, site-wise information.

It directed the Delhi government’s archaeology department to file a fresh affidavit with monument-wise details, including steps taken and updated photographs of the sites.

Civic bodies’ response also inadequate

The court also flagged shortcomings in the work of civic agencies:

The Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) has surveyed only 62 out of 85 identified monuments, with several aspects still incomplete.

The New Delhi Municipal Council (NDMC) has surveyed just 2 out of 54 monuments under its jurisdiction.

The Bench extended its directions to these bodies as well, asking them to submit detailed reports on the condition and maintenance of heritage sites.

Need for coordination

The court noted that multiple agencies share responsibility for heritage conservation and said NDMC must coordinate effectively with other authorities.

It added that based on suggestions from NDMC, it may issue further directions to ensure proper monitoring and coordination among agencies.

The matter arose from a petition filed by Rajeev Suri regarding encroachment of the Gumti of Shaikh Ali, a Lodhi-era monument in Delhi.

During the proceedings, the court expanded the scope to examine the status of multiple protected heritage sites across the national capital.

The latest order signals the court’s dissatisfaction with the pace and quality of compliance by authorities responsible for preserving these monuments.