The Supreme Court on Wednesday (October 7, 2026) pulled up the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) and the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) for their “total lackadaisical approach” to tackling widespread encroachments and ensuring the preservation of notified heritage structures in the national capital.
“We find a total lackadaisical approach by the authorities in either assisting the Court Commissioner or acting in a manner which would indicate that they are serious about what they implement on the ground. Matters ranging from keeping the sites free of encroachment, their cleanliness, status reports, details with regard to ownership, settlement, and the current position are not forthcoming. Even the authorities, which, in law, are presumed to have knowledge of these matters and are supposed to maintain records, are blissfully ignorant of such details,” a Bench of Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and N. Kotiswar Singh said.
The observations came while the top court was hearing a petition filed by Delhi resident Rajeev Suri concerning the preservation and restoration of heritage sites across the national capital.
‘Lack of cohesion’
The Bench also flagged an “absolute lack of cohesion” among various government departments and civic bodies in implementing its earlier directions to clear extensive encroachments and litter from Lodhi-era tombs in Zamrudpur. It accordingly summoned senior officials of the authorities concerned to appear before it on the next date of hearing on October 15, and indicated that a senior government officer would be entrusted with ensuring inter-departmental coordination.
“We feel a senior Central government officer has to now be made in charge so that the issue can be coordinated among the official respondents/departments/government by such officer,” the Bench said.
Accordingly, it directed the Secretary of the Union Ministry of Culture, the Commissioner of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD), the Chairperson of the New Delhi Municipal Council (NDMC), the Secretary of the Delhi government’s Department of Archaeology, the Director General of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), the Commissioner of the Delhi Development Authority (DDA), the Director General of the Central Public Works Department (CPWD), and the Managing Director of the Delhi Tourism and Transportation Development Corporation (DTTDC) to remain physically present in court on the next date of hearing.
The court-appointed team of commissioners, led by senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, placed a report before the Bench detailing the state of five heritage monuments in south Delhi’s Zamrudpur. It pointed out that despite being notified heritage structures, the monuments had been heavily encroached upon and the surrounding areas were strewn with litter.
“There are five monuments in Zamrudpur, all five under the MCD. On either side, you can see buildings constructed up to the fifth floor… It is in a frightfully terrible condition. If they have notified them, the least they could have done is not permit any construction, at least within some perimeter,” Mr. Sankaranarayanan submitted.
He also pointed out that the interiors of the monuments had been used as dumping grounds, while one of them had, until recently, been used as a cow shed. The MCD subsequently cleared the waste following the court’s intervention.
‘Casual’ approach
Taking exception to the findings, Justice Amanullah questioned senior advocate S.D. Sanjay, appearing for the MCD, on why the encroachments had not been removed despite the court’s earlier directions.
“You are totally casual. You are not bothered about the area, and that is why these things have happened. It speaks volumes… It is shocking”, he remarked.
Mr. Sanjay submitted that garbage from the sites had been cleared and efforts were under way to remove the encroachments and restore the heritage structures.
Turning its attention to the ASI, the Bench questioned its failure to maintain the heritage structures under its jurisdiction, with Justice Amanullah observing that such lapses were “diminishing” the institution’s credibility.
“What organisation are you presiding over? … Every ASI monument is only a formality… Are you only passing your time? You have not understood the seriousness of the proceedings,” Justice Amanullah remarked, addressing ASI Director General Yadubir Singh Rawat, who was present in court.
When Mr. Rawat pointed to a shortage of resources and said the ASI was responsible for maintaining nearly 4000 monuments, the Bench asked him to approach the Centre for additional manpower.
“Tell the government that you need 1,000 more hands for this… Why will we tolerate red-tapism?” Justice Amanullah remarked.
The Bench granted the authorities one “last indulgence” to address the illegal encroachments, warning that “stringent orders” would follow if its directions were not complied with. It noted that it had been monitoring the issue for more than a year and a half and could no longer “give any benefit of doubt to the officers”.
SOP and geomapping for heritage sites: MCD
Meanwhile, in an affidavit filed before the court, the MCD outlined plans to put in place a standard operating procedure (SOP) for heritage sites under its control and said it was considering the use of geomapping to better identify and monitor notified structures.
“The MCD is in the process of preparing a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for the heritage sites falling within its jurisdiction, with the object of bringing greater uniformity and clarity to the processes of identification, inspection, documentation, reporting and follow-up action in relation to such sites,” the affidavit stated.
The civic body said the SOP was “under preparation” and was expected to be finalised by the end of October.
“The MCD is further examining the feasibility of undertaking geomapping of the notified heritage sites falling within its jurisdiction so as to facilitate more accurate identification and location-based monitoring of the sites,” it added.
The court-appointed commissioners had earlier informed the Bench that Zamrudpur has five Grade-I heritage structures under the MCD, one of which could not be traced. Their findings also drew attention to four other heritage sites facing illegal encroachments. These included Lal Mahal in Nizamuddin, which was reported as “missing” in a 2020 report by the Indian National Trust for Art and Cultural Heritage (INTACH), and Tilangani Tomb, which had been encroached upon and was being used as a residential place.
The condition of the monuments had drawn the court’s ire earlier as well. On August 24, the Bench had pulled up the MCD over what it termed “total callousness and suppression of facts” after noting that the civic body had maintained that the heritage sites were free of encroachments.
“The pictures are so appalling. We are not able to understand how such a stand could be taken by MCD,” the Bench had observed.
Published – October 08, 2026 01:01 am IST
