ORDER
1. These cases remind the Court and likewise any educated person, to “value and preserve the rich heritage of our composite culture”. These words are not of this Court but taken from Sub-clause 5 of Article 51-A, from the chapter on Fundamental Duties, in The Constitution of India. This case is about neglect by the State of ancient monuments and sites. Again, the State needs to be reminded of what ought to be the State policy in this regard, as directed by the Constitution. It is given in Article 49. The subject is : Protection of Monuments and Places and Objects of National Importance. The text of this article reads: “It shall be the obligation of the State to protect every monument or place or object of artistic or historic interest, declared by or under law made by Parliament, to be of national importance, from spoliation, disfigurement, destruction, removal, disposal or export, as the case may be.”
2. Exchanging pleadings and counter-pleadings and filing counter-affidavits on behalf of the State is not going to preserve the archaeological sites and the heritage of Bihar. This is neither the preserve of the government, nor of the bureaucracy which runs it. The heritage belongs to the people of Bihar. This state abounds in archaeological sites, the like of which some other states of the nation do not have. Bihar was once a sight-seer’s paradise. Today they are called tourists. The sites are in a neglected state and face destruction from weather and the ravages of plunderers.
3. The mystery which preserves ancient civilisations in India, a poetic concept of Mohammad Iqbal in his verses “Tarana-ai-Hindi” will cease to have any meaning if this abject neglect of archaeological sites and remains continues. The obligation to preserve these sites is of the State and the duty falls squarely on the bureaucracy. The subject is a portfolio of the Government. Where does the money to preserve these ancient monuments and sites go-to? Unless the answer is that there is no allocation of funds, in which case Bihar’s pedigree to be a State which can touch the times of ancient civilisations may be treated as lost. Again, the blame will have to be taken by the bureaucracy.
4. Then, the comparison is shameful that an imperial Viceroy, Lord Curzon and a civil servant Indologist-engineer, Cunningham, took more pains to preserve these ancient monuments and sites than the Civil Servant who owes his lineage to the raj days, makes capital out of these monuments for a once-a-year party between the bigwigs and VIPs who are flown in for a weekend extravaganza, and that is all the interest which is shown.
The allocation and expenditure figures are being hidden from the Court, though asked for many times. It is like a school boy hiding his homework from his teacher. Preserving ancient monuments and sites is the homework of the department which has been specially constituted for this purpose. A hundred years ago was enacted a legislation by the Governor General in Council, on the subject which engages the Court. This was the Ancient Monuments Preservation Act, 1904. The last of the legislation on this subject, after the Constitution came in, is the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958. Bihar also has a State legislation, known as the Bihar Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites, Remains and Art Treasurers Act, 1976.
5. There is no dearth of legislation or statutory obligation which calls attention of the Government to preserve the archaeological sites, the ancient monuments, the protected monuments, the art and the treasures which are Bihar’s heritage, and the nation’s property. This much of the order is for the government, which is guilty of abject neglect of the subject of preservation of monuments which have dated into history and are protected by law.
6. It is also a shame that one of the finest monuments which constantly reminds the nation of the Buddhist civilization, the Bodhgaya temple at Bodhgaya, is being christened as a World Heritage Site in a few days from now the main festivities of which observance will take place at the national capital, New Delhi, where invitees from the world over will join the ceremony of the declaration. Why could not this entire ceremony take place at the temple which is being declared as a World Heritage Site? Does the answer have anything to do with everyday life and liberty? Will this not effect the protection of ancient monuments also, and the possibility of damage from vandals?
7. Now corning straight to the point of the subjects which are before the Court. These are the ancient site and archaeological remains at Kumrahar, which dates back to the Mauryan Empire. This site is in Patna. The other is the recently-excavated site which is unfolding archaeological treasures known as the Mira Bigha site, Jahanabad. The Court is told that this site dates back to ninth to tenth century, A.D., as per present assessment. The first site has seen encroachment by slums around it, salinity and slush of sewerage and drainage water. It is a matter of time, how long the archaeological finds which are at this site will gradually dissolve like a sugar cube in water, if what is going on continues. This would be a tragedy. The Mira Bigha site is witnessing an onslaught of thievery and pilferage by the idol seekers. One wonders, why Mohammed Ghazni is blamed for what is attributed to him, in what he did brazenly. What is being done in Bihar, if this pilferage is taking place, is by the people of Bihar itself and is no less destructive of the heritage.
8. What does the law say about it? Under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958 such areas of historic heritage are to be cordoned off without let or hindrance, with determination, and the areas adjacent and contiguous to these sites have to be declared as a regulated, prohibited, protected area. This is the law: Not to do it renders the State of Bihar liable for not protecting the monuments. It does not absolve the Central Government either, in joining the State of Bihar. These areas are to be cleared so that ancient monuments and historical sites are protected with the same protection and tenacity as an Indian woman would protect her mangal sutra. Every District Magistrate within whose area such archaeological sites lie, owes a personal moral and Constitutional obligation for efforts to preserve these sites, so does the Archaeological Officer, under the 1958 Act.
9. What exactly is so secret about the funds which the officials of the Bihar Government have which are squandered at yearly festivities in the name of “tourism”, while nothing worth the name is done to preserve the ancient monuments and sites which are the concrete cultural heritage of the nation. Bihar is fortunate to be in a position to preserve so many sites, and it does not matter to which civilisation, religion or culture these sites belong. Regardless of the period of history to which they belong and cultural, religious and ethnic diversities, they are part of our composite culture; the Constitution says so.
10. The Additional Advocate General II desired an adjournment for two weeks to place the complete financial statement before the Court on the allocation made and the expenditure on the subject of preservation of the ancient monuments and sites, a subject matter of much legislation, of a white paper, or a policy paper, on which the Government of Bihar discharges its obligation to carry out the fundamental duty to preserve the cultural heritage, the plans to protect and maintain the monuments. Including plans for the two sites, that is Kumrahar in Patna and Mira Bigha site in Jahanabad.
11. As desired by the Additional Advocate General, list after two weeks on February 27, 2004, under the same heading.
