New Delhi, Aug 19 (UNI) The Supreme Court today directed that historic monuments located inside Mehrauli Archaeological Park, including the 12th-century Ashiq Allah Dargah and the Chillagah of Baba Farid, must be preserved and asked the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) to consider taking them under its supervision for repair and renovation.
A Bench comprising Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice R. Mahadevan was hearing appeals against a Delhi High Court order which had declined to protect the structures from proposed demolition by the Delhi Development Authority (DDA). Petitioners argued that the centuries-old sites, of cultural and religious significance were wrongly treated as encroachments.
Pulling up the DDA during the hearing, Justice Nagarathna asked: “Why do you want to demolish it in the first place?” The authority responded that it was not targeting the dargah itself but unauthorised ancillary constructions around it. The Bench, however, underlined that while no fresh construction or alteration should be permitted, the ancient monuments themselves must be preserved.
“That monument has to be preserved. We are only concerned with the monument,” Justice Nagarathna observed.
Advocate Nizam Pasha, for the appellants, submitted that the structures could not be dismissed as encroachments. He cited the ASI’s report, which confirmed their antiquity, including an inscription recording that the tomb of Shaikh Shahibuddin was built in 1317 AD. The report also noted that the dargah and chillagah fall within the 200-metre regulated zone of Prithviraj Chauhan’s citadel under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act.
Highlighting their continuing cultural significance, the ASI said devotees light lamps at the Ashiq Allah Dargah for the fulfilment of wishes and visit Baba Farid’s chillagah to ward off evil spirits.
The court also cautioned that heritage protection cannot be misused to shield illegal constructions. Referring to its earlier directions, Justice Nagarathna said: “You cannot have temples in the middle of the road or on footpaths. There should be no construction around this monument.”
Disposing of the appeals, the Supreme Court observed: “The ASI should take under its consideration the supervision of the monuments in question in the matter of repair, renovation.”
