‘Instruct all local bodies not to permit constructions around protected monuments sans ASI's nod'
Also, the court directed the government to make it clear to the officials empowered to grant permission for construction of buildings that disciplinary enquiry would be initiated if it was found that such permissions were granted contrary to law.
Petition rejected
Justice M. Nagaprasanna issued the directions while rejecting a petition filed by Denis Crasta of Mangaluru, who had questioned the ASI's notice issued in 2024 asking him to stop construction of a house.
The Mangaluru City Corporation (MCC) in December 2023 approved the petitioner's plan for constructing a residential building on the landing owned by the petitioner. However, the ASI in May 2024 issued a notice to the petitioner asking him to stop construction as it was commenced sans obtaining a NoC from it as the petitioner's land comes within 150 metres from the Mangaladevi temple in Mangaluru, which is declared as a protected monument under the provisions of the Ancient Monuments and Archaeology Sites and Remains Act, 1958.
While the petitioner, citing Google Earth images, claimed that his land was situated 151.1 metres from the temple, the ASI after an inspection of the construction site pointed out that it was situated 64 metres from the prohibited area of the protected monument, and hence no new construction can be permitted on this land as per the provisions of the 1958 Act.
Interestingly, the government had told the court that permission granted for construction sans NoC from ASI was illegal while pointing out that the petitioner's act of obtaining permission and putting up construction to a certain level is an act of 'fraud played by the MCC in connivance with the petitioner.'
Indifference to rules
Observing that it is not understandable how the MCC granted permission without keeping the ASI in the loop, the court said the permission was granted in blithe ignorance or indifference to the statutory embargo.
Stating that officials of the MCC had wantonly ignored the mandate of the law permitting the construction, the court directed the government to initiate a disciplinary enquiry against the erring officials of the MCC as per law, and take appropriate action on identifying the role of each erring officials in grant of permission contrary to the law.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
20 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Police caution accused persons of invoking KCCOA if they commit repeated crimes
Invoking provisions of the Karnataka Control of Organised Crimes Act, 2000 (KCCOA) against two undertrial prisoners of Mangaluru district prison for extorting money from another undertrial prisoner, the Mangaluru City Police on Wednesday, July 23, cautioned anti-social elements of stern action if they continue committing crimes. In a video statement here, Police Commissioner Sudheer Kumar Reddy said even those in the company of KCCOA accused would be treated on a par with the accused and booked under the Act. Assaulting inmate In the instant case, Dhanush Bhandary alias Dhanu, Dilesh Bangera alias Dilu, Loy Vegas alias Loy, and Sachin Talapadi, who were under judicial custody in the prison had allegedly assaulted another inmate, Mithun, on July 9. They threatened to kill him of he did not pay ₹50,000 to them and allegedly forced the inmate to inform his wife when he calls her from the jail telephone booth to deposit money to their accounts. Mithun had not informed the jail authorities about the assault out of fear and he reported the same when senior police officials visited the prison on July 12 for inspection. following this, jail superintendent Sharanappa filed a complaint with the Barke Police. The police had registered a case of extortion against the four. Mr. Reddy said two of them already were facing charges under KCCOA and the other two too were booked under that Act on Wednesday, July 23. Earlier cases Mr. Reddy said the accused already had more than one case under trial in courts that attract more than three years punishment. Existence of such cases would come under the definitions of Organised Crime, Organised Crime Syndicate and Continuing unlawful activity as defined in KCOCA Act, if they commit fresh crimes, he explained. Even though the offences registered under the Bharatiya Nyaya Samhita attract lesser punishment when proved guilty, the minimum imprisonment under KCCOA for committing offences defined under it, would be five years that could be extended to life imprisonment. Therefore, every one should be cautious in not being a part of organised crime, the commissioner said.
Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
Justice Varma's removal: Process to begin soon, LS Speaker to name probe panel
The process of removal of Justice Yashwant Varma will be set in motion in the Lok Sabha soon with Speaker Om Birla expected to soon announce the constitution of a statutory committee to investigate the grounds on which the removal of the judge is sought, The Indian Expres has learned. Birla and Rajya Sabha Deputy Chairman Harivansh met Wednesday with Secretaries General of both the Houses and the officials discussed the modalities to finalise the procedure. Union Home Minister Amit Shah also joined the meeting later. The discussions took place on a day the Supreme Court said it will set up a bench to hear Justice Varma's plea challenging the legal validity of the in-house inquiry committee which confirmed charges of recovery of unaccounted cash from his official residence in Delhi. This comes in the shadow of Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar's surprise resignation Monday evening and, as The Indian Express reported Tuesday, hours after his decision to accept the Opposition's notice on Justice Varma had rubbed the government the wrong way. This had created 'confusion,' government sources said, because Birla had received a similar notice from Lok Sabha MPs with 145 signatures around 12.30 pm Monday, hours before Dhankhar made the reference to the Opposition notice in the Rajya Sabha. 'The Speaker received the notices from the Lok Sabha MPs and he had told us that he would constitute a committee. That's what the law says,' said a senior BJP MP who was part of the group that submitted the notice. BJP sources said that Dhankhar, who resigned as vice president and Rajya Sabha chairman, did not 'admit' the Opposition's notice. Pointing out that 63 Rajya Sabha MPs, from various Opposition parties, gave a notice for the removal of Justice Varma, Dhankhar did mention on Monday that it met the 'numerical requirement of signing' by MPs for 'setting in motion a process of removal of a High Court judge. But he added that according to the Judges (Inquiry) Act, when notices of a motion are submitted on the same day in both the Houses of Parliament, a committee to examine the charges levelled against the judge will be constituted by the Lok Sabha Speaker and the Rajya Sabha Chairman.' Former Lok Sabha Secretary PDT Achary said that when the Speaker received the notice from Lok Sabha MPs, the process of removal was set in motion. 'The Speaker has to admit it. Then the Speaker will appoint a statutory committee, the Speaker does not have to bring it before the House. Because the House has no role at that stage,' Achary said. According to Achary, Dhankhar did not seem to have admitted the motion. 'The Rajya Sabha Chairman has to admit the motion and then if simultaneously moved in both the Houses, the presiding officers would together constitute the statutory committee. But Dhankhar just mentioned about the notice in the House on Monday, he had to admit it as per the law, which perhaps has not taken place,' Achary added. However, a senior minister said that the Rajya Sabha chair, now deputy chairman Harivansh officiating as chairman, would be consulted for the constitution of the committee because Dhankhar had mentioned it being in the chair. Sources said the statutory committee – with one judge of the Supreme Court, one from the High Courts, and a distinguished jurist – will be announced soon. The committee will probe the charges against Justice Varma and submit a report to the Lok Sabha Speaker. If the committee finds him guilty, a motion will be taken up in the Lok Sabha and it will be discussed in detail. The motion will be put to vote and it requires a two-third majority to be passed. Once the process is over the same, will be repeated in the Rajya Sabha. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court Wednesday said it would constitute a bench to hear Justice Varma's plea seeking to invalidate a report by an in-house inquiry panel, which found him guilty of misconduct in the cash discovery row. Justice Varma has also sought quashing of the May 8 recommendation by then Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna urging Parliament to initiate impeachment against him. Justice Varma also challenged the conclusions of the report by the three-member in-house judicial panel. The three-judge panel, headed by Chief Justice Sheel Nagu of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, conducted the inquiry for 10 days, examined 55 witnesses and visited the scene of the fire that started at around 11.35 pm on March 14 at the official residence of Justice Varma, then a sitting judge of the Delhi High Court and now in the Allahabad High Court. Acting on the report, then CJI Khanna wrote to President Droupadi Murmu and Prime Minister Narendra Modi recommending the judge's impeachment.
The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
Farmers' associations in Tiruppur resolve to sustain continuous sit-in protest demanding a solution to Inam land issue
Farmers' associations have resolved to continue their sit-in protest that entered the ninth day on Wednesday at Avinashipalayam in Tiruppur district, asserting their right to the Inam land they are using for agricultural purposes for generations. Espousing the cause of 30 lakh families across the State, the protesters estimate that their rights to 13 lakh acres of land they have been using for generations have been denied by the HR and CE Department and the Wakf Board. The protest will continue until a definite solution is found. According to Karunamoorthy, State Coordinator, Inam Nila Iyakkam, an umbrella organisation representing the affected farmers, lessees, and tenants using the Inam land, the zero value fixation for the land by the Registration Department has hit the farmers hard. The premise of the government authorities that the farmers enjoying the land under the Ryotwari system were encroachers was unacceptable. The protestors have urged the Tamil Nadu Government to emulate the intervention made in recent years by the Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, and Kerala governments, in the interest of a section of inamdars who had been left out in the earlier exercise of conversion of the inam land into pattas. The farmers have been seeking effective implementation of the Tamil Nadu Inam Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1963, that provides for the acquisition of rights of land holders in Inam estates, and introduction of the ryotwari settlement in such estates. Likewise, the farmers have also emphasised on effective implementation of the Tamil Nadu Minor Inam (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1963, that provides for the acquisition of the rights of Inamdars in minor inams in the State, and the introduction of Ryotwari Settlement in such Inams.
