Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, residents of Vaidya Wadi, Mumbai, filed a Public Interest Litigation challenging the demolition of a temple dedicated to Lord Hanuman and the construction of a commercial complex by respondent No.9, M/s. Kushalraj Land Developers Pvt. Ltd. The petitioners claimed that the temple was an ancient monument protected under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958, and that its demolition was illegal. They sought restoration of the temple and a stay on construction. The respondents, including the Union of India, State of Maharashtra, Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai, and the developer, opposed the petition, arguing that the temple was not a protected monument, that the demolition was carried out with the consent of the deity's next friend and the Vaidyawadi Rahiwasi Sahakari Society, and that the construction was duly approved. The court examined the provisions of the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958, and found that no notification under Sections 3 or 4 had been issued declaring the temple a protected monument. The court also noted that the petitioners had no locus standi as they were not the next friend of the deity and that the petition was motivated by personal interests. The court dismissed the petition, holding that there was no public interest involved and that the petition was an abuse of process. The court also disposed of the connected notices of motion and interim applications.
Headnote
A) Public Interest Litigation - Maintainability - Locus Standi - Petitioners, residents of the locality, challenged demolition of a temple and construction of a commercial complex - Court held that the petition was not maintainable as the petitioners failed to demonstrate any legal right or public interest, and the temple was not a protected monument - Held that the petition was filed with ulterior motives and was an abuse of process (Paras 1-10). B) Ancient Monuments - Protected Monument - Sections 2, 3, 4, 35, 38 Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958 - The temple was not declared a protected monument under the Act - No notification under Section 3 or 4 was issued - Held that the temple was not entitled to protection under the Act (Paras 11-20). C) Religious Structure - Demolition - Construction - The temple was demolished with the consent of the deity's next friend and the society - The construction of a commercial complex was approved by the Municipal Corporation - Held that there was no illegality in the demolition and construction (Paras 21-30).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petition challenging the demolition of a temple and construction of a commercial complex is maintainable as a Public Interest Litigation; whether the temple was a protected monument under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958; whether the petitioners have locus standi.
Final Decision
The court dismissed the Writ Petition No.2627 of 2014, holding that it was not maintainable and was an abuse of process. The connected notices of motion and interim applications were disposed of.
Law Points
- Public Interest Litigation
- Maintainability
- Locus Standi
- Protected Monument
- Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act
- 1958
- Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act
- 1949
- Development Control Regulations
- Religious Structure
- Demolition
- Construction
