THE DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF ARCHAEOLOGY AND MUSEUMS, JAIPUR & ANR. versus ASHISH GAUTAM & ORS.

Citation: [2020] 4 S.C.R. 173 · Decided: 11-05-2020 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ARUN MISHRA, S. RAVINDRA BHAT · Disposal: Case Partly allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
173
THE DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF ARCHAEOLOGY AND
MUSEUMS, JAIPUR & ANR.
v.
ASHISH GAUTAM & ORS.
(Civil Appeal No. 4070 of 2016)
MAY 11, 2020
[ARUN MISHRA AND S. RAVINDRA BHAT, JJ.]
Forest Area and Wildlife – Protection of – The matter pertains
to a Monument ‘Sisodia Rani ka Bagh’ (‘the Monument’) situated
in Jaipur, Rajasthan – A writ petition was filed to issue appropriate
directions about the safety and security of the wildlife in the Reserve
Forest Area and restraining the use of laser lights, loud music and
fireworks in the Monument – The High Court transferred the matter
to NGT – The Tribunal held that the Monument is part of the forest
area and directed that no permission should be granted to organise
social functions like marriages etc. and for the use of fireworks,
loud music in the Monument – Before the Supreme Court, the
Appellant-Department of Archaeology and Museums contended that
the Tribunal was not justified in putting a blanket ban upon holding
of ceremonies in the Monument situated adjacent to the City – Held:
The blanket ban imposed by the Tribunal was not called for as area
could be used for appropriate functions and for holding events to
attract tourists – No inconvenience is going to be caused in the
area considering the situation of the Monument – The following
directions were issued: (i) The Monument may be used for
appropriate multi-purpose activities between 8.00 A.M. to 8.00 P.M.
only –  No activity to be permitted after 8.00 P.M; (ii)The use of
laser lights, loud music, and fireworks is ordered to be completely
restrained; (iii) Musical and other fountains to be maintained and
to be kept in working order; (iv) Other conditions imposed by the
Department be observed strictly; (v) Let requisite supervisory and
other staff/gardeners, etc. be dedicated for maintainance; (vi) It is
directed that a Consultant be appointed for further beautification
of the area and for the requisite horticultural development and an
additional project plan be prepared and placed on record, for this
purpose.
173
[2020] 4 S.C.R. 173
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
174
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2020] 4 S.C.R.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 4070
of 2016.
From the Judgment and Order dated 05.11.2014 of the National
Green Tribunal, Central Zonal Bench, Bhopal in Original Application
No. 132/2013(CZ).
Dr. Manish Singhvi, Sr. Adv., D. K. Deven, Ms. Shailja Nanda
Mishra, Arpit Prakash, Sandeep Kumar Jha, Milind Kumar, Rohit K.
Singh, Advs. for the appearing parties.
Respondent-in-person.
The following Judgment of the Court was delivered:
JUDGMENT
1. The appeal has been preferred by the Department of
Archaeology and Museums aggrieved by the judgment and order dated
5.11.2014 passed by the National Green Tribunal, Central Zonal, Bhopal
(for short, ‘the Tribunal’) in Original Application No.132 of 2013 (CZ).
The matter pertains to “Sisodia Rani ka Bagh” (for short, ‘the
Monument’), situated at Jhalana, Jaipur, State of Rajasthan.
2. The Department of Art, Literature, Culture, and Archaeology
declared the Monument as protected one vide notification dated 8.2.2012.
Thereupon, Rajasthan General Development Department transferred
the Monument for supervision to the Department of Archaeological and
Museums. The ceremonies like marriage and other events used to be
held in the Monument. For that, a notification dated 7.6.2012 specifying
the conditions for holding such ceremonies was issued.
3. Respondent No.1 – Ashish Gautam preferred a writ petition
before the High Court of Rajasthan by way of Public Interest Litigation,
in which a prayer was made to issue appropriate directions about the
safety and security of the wildlife in the Reserve Forest Area and further
directions for restraining the use of laser lights, loud music and fireworks
in the Monument. The High Court of Rajasthan transferred the matter
to the NGT. By way of impugned judgment and order, the Tribunal held
that the Monument is part of the forest area and directed that no
permission should be granted to organise social functions like marriages,
etc. and for the use of fireworks, loud music in the Monument. Hence,
the appeal.
4. Learned senior counsel on behalf of the appellants argued that
the Tribunal was not justified in putting a blanket ban upon holding of
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
175
ceremonies in the Monument, situated adjacent to the city.  The prohibition
imposed shall adversely affect State tourism and would render the entire
Monument of no use, and its upk

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.