On January 18, the Supreme Court's three-judge bench, led by Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Abhay S. Oka, and JB Pardiwala, established a five-member Supervisory Committee for the protection and renovation of several heritage sites in Rajasthan. Pradeep Nandrajog, former Chief Justice of the Bombay and Rajasthan High Courts, was also appointed as Chairman of the Committee by the Supreme Court. The bench issued detailed orders while hearing Applications filed by the Respondents in the Civil Appeal, the subject of which is the Estate of the former Maharaja of Khetri, Shri Raja Sardar Singh, which also involves several heritage properties.

It is important to note that the rights to the Maharaja's Estate are the subject of a separate civil suit that is currently pending adjudication before the High Court of Delhi. However, because the civil suit had been pending in the High Court for over a decade, the issue of heritage property maintenance was brought before the bench through Interim Applications filed by the Respondents.

By an earlier order dated 22-09-2022, the Supreme Court directed the state of Rajasthan to do the following: "Insofar as the renovation of the property is concerned, learned counsel for the State volunteers that the renovation would be carried out under the guidance of the Archaeological Survey of India and only experts would be permitted to device methods for renovation and conservation. We thus call upon the State to submit complete proposal in this behalf and at request of the Trust we also permit them to submit the proposal and both proposals to be exchanged."

The bench in its order stated, "It is shocking the manner in which the state of Rajasthan has permitted its heritage to be destroyed and continues to permit it to be destroyed, while claiming its rights under the Rajasthan Estates Regulation Act, 1956. Our order dated 29-02-2022 already sets forth the controversy. The State has failed to comply with the said order."

The bench then stated in its order, "In our query, learned counsel submits it is the Collector, Jaipur who is incharge of the so called efforts. No plan has been placed before us. We have noted that whoever is responsible is in breach of our order. Let notice of contempt be issued to the Collector, Jaipur, returnable on the next date and explain as to why we should not initiate notice of contempt and punish him in accordance with law for what is perceived as a wilful disobedience of the orders of this court. Learned Counsel accepts notice on behalf of the collector. Reply be filed within 4 weeks."

The bench further, in its order, stated, "The issue of restoration of heritage undoubtedly cannot be for the state government which has shown no consideration for the same. Whether ultimately the trust is entitled to it or not or whether agnates or cognates are so entitled, is a different subject matter for which different civil proceedings are on. But, in these proceedings we are concerned with how the heritage can be saved and restored. The petitioners have placed before us an assessment report of January 2023. This is the only report before us as the state has done nothing. We have perused this comprehensive report but it falls out that restoration has to be carried out. We are inclined to entrust the restoration work to the group of architects who have prepared the report."

The Respondents, led by Senior Advocate C. Aryama Sundaram, argued before the bench today that the properties in question, which are currently in the care of the State Government, have been reduced to a despicable state. Sundaram also told the bench that, despite the court's most recent orders, the state had wilfully disobeyed and abdicated its responsibility to follow the court's orders. Sundaram then presented to the bench a book titled "Lost Treasures" that narrates the unfortunate state of these heritage properties and includes photographic evidence collected as late as January 4th, 2023, a month and a half after the bench's previous order.

Case Title: State of Rajasthan & ors. Vs. Lord Nothbook & Ors. 
Citation: C.A. No. 6677/2019

Appearance of advocates:-

For Appellant(s)
Mr. Milind Kumar, AOR

For Respondent(s)

C. Aryama Sundaram

Mr. Anshuman Srivastav, Adv.
Mr. E.C. Agrawala, AOR
Mr. Rishabh Parikh, Adv.
Ms. Lakshmi Iyer, Adv.
Mr. Kumar Mihir, AOR
Mr. Nishit Agrawal, AOR