Supreme Court has taken notice of a Special Leave Petition filed by the Save Old Goa Action Committee. The petition challenges a ruling by the Goa Bench of the Bombay High Court, which had set aside an order issued by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) to demolish a residential property located within the UNESCO heritage zone of Old Goa. The High Court cited violations of natural justice principles as the basis for its decision.
The Supreme Court, led by a Division Bench comprising Justices BV Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan, has expressed reservations about the High Court's swift decision to nullify the ASI's demolition order. Instead of outright quashing the order, the apex court believes the matter should have been referred back to the ASI for further evaluation.
The core of the dispute revolves around a house located in the historic Old Goa area, nestled amidst two nationally significant monuments: the Church of St. Cajetan and Viceroy's Arch of Old Goa. Various organizations, including the Save Old Goa Action Committee, raised objections, asserting that the construction of the new house ran afoul of multiple regulations.
The backdrop of the case traces its origins to an order issued on August 16, 2022, by the Director General of ASI. This order mandated the removal of the contested house under Section 19(2) of the Ancient Monuments and Archeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958. Section 19 imposes stringent restrictions on property rights within protected areas, prohibiting construction and other activities without prior approval from the Central Government.
When this ASI order was challenged in the High Court, the court identified shortcomings in the process. It noted the absence of a Show Cause Notice or an opportunity for the concerned party or the previous owners to present their case. The court drew upon established legal precedents that underscored the critical importance of adhering to principles of natural justice.
Furthermore, the High Court emphasized that any order affecting a party's civil rights must adhere to these principles. It pointed out that administrative inquiries are increasingly regarded as quasi-judicial in nature, necessitating fairness and due process in decision-making.
The High Court ultimately ruled that the ASI's failure to provide the affected party an opportunity to defend itself constituted a clear violation of natural justice principles. Consequently, the court annulled the ASI's demolition order, asserting that it was legally flawed due to this omission.
Case Title: "SAVE OLD GOA ACTION COMMITTEE v. CORVUS URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE LLP & ORS.
Website designed, developed and maintained by webexy