The Supreme Court on Thursday reserved the verdict while hearing petitions pertaining to alleged illegal excavation and construction work around Jagannath temple in Puri as part of the Srimandir Corridor Project.
A bench comprising justices BR Gavai and Hima Kohli heard the two separate petitions filed by Ardhendu Das and Sumanta Ghadei alleging illegal excavation and construction work by the Odisha government at the temple.
The apex court has reserved its verdict till Friday after hearing the arguments of both the parties. The court was informed from the petitioners’ side how construction work under 100 metre prohibited area at Jagannath temple are carried out without the nod of the Archaeological Survey of India and the National Monument Authority.
On the other hand, three senior public prosecutors like Pinaki Mishra, Kapil Sibal and Advocate General were seen clearing the Odisha government’s side on the issue.
Petitioners’ lawyer Goutam Das said, “There is a threat to the complete heritage structure as excavation was carried out in prohibited area in gross violation of Section 20A of The Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958. Besides, we inform the court that the Central Committee had also submitted its report claiming the same. The state government is carrying out unauthorised construction work. This poses a serious threat to the structure of the ancient temple following which public prosecutors claimed that no constructional activities are in progress right now.”
At the outset, senior advocate Mahalakshmi Pavani, appearing for the petitioner, said there’s a clear embargo that there can be no construction in the prohibited area. “The state government did not even take permission to construct in the regulated area,” she submitted.
The state, she said, got a no objection certificate from the National Monuments Authority (NMA) and went ahead. She said the NMA could not have granted a valid certificate and this is something only the director of archaeology in the central or the state government can do.
Advocate General for Odisha Ashok Kumar Parija submitted that under The Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, the authority is the NMA, and the competent authority has been notified to be the Odisha government's director culture.
“Construction does not mean repair or remake existing structures or clean the sewage, drains etc. This is how it is understood and DG ASI also understands the same way.
“Grant of permission was by director culture... director culture of the government of Odisha is the competent authority. What was prohibited within 100 metres was construction. The concept plan of the state aims to provide amenities and beautify the temple,” he said.
He added that 60,000 people visit the temple everyday and there is need for more toilets.
“The amicus curiae in the case pointed out there was a necessity of more toilets and court had issued directions in that regard,” he added.