Calcutta High Court Instructs ASI to Participate in Siraj-ud-Daulah Property Case
Click to start listening
Synopsis
The Calcutta High Court has ordered the ASI to participate in a public interest litigation that highlights the West Bengal government's inaction in preserving the property of Nawab Siraj-ud-Daulah, which is at risk due to erosion. The Chief Justice criticized the state for neglecting heritage sites.
Key Takeaways
- Calcutta High Court directs ASI to join the case.
- Public interest litigation accuses West Bengal of negligence.
- Historical property of Nawab Siraj-ud-Daulah endangered by river erosion.
- Chief Justice criticizes state for destruction of heritage.
- State government must submit a report next week.
Kolkata, Feb 27 (NationPress) A division bench of the Calcutta High Court, led by Chief Justice T.S., mandated the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) to engage in a public interest litigation alleging that the West Bengal government is hesitant in safeguarding the estate of Nawab Siraj-ud-Daulah, the final autonomous Nawab of the erstwhile undivided Bengal.
The downfall of Nawab Siraj-ud-Daulah’s governance, centered in the Murshidabad district of West Bengal, signified the onset of British East India Company dominance over Bengal, and subsequently, much of India.
The petitioner in this public interest litigation asserted that the remaining historical site in Murshidabad, which once belonged to Nawab Siraj-ud-Daulah and spans approximately nine bighas or 5.624 acres, is gradually succumbing to the erosion caused by the River Bhagirathi; yet, the state government has not initiated any visible measures for its preservation.
During the hearing on Thursday, the petitioner pointed out the preservation efforts for Vivekananda Rock in Kanyakumari and argued that the West Bengal government should implement analogous strategies to safeguard the historical property of Nawab Siraj-ud-Daulah in Murshidabad.
The petitioner also accused the West Bengal Heritage Commission of being nearly inactive and failing to take any action regarding this matter.
Throughout the proceedings, the Chief Justice expressed frustration with the state government's handling of the situation. He remarked that it is regrettable that high-rise constructions are occurring at heritage sites, leading to the destruction of historical places rather than their preservation.
The Chief Justice emphasized that while it is straightforward to demolish anything, this can be accomplished in merely 48 hours, “but restoring it is an entirely different challenge,” he noted. He subsequently instructed the state government to present a comprehensive report to the court by the following week while also mandating its involvement in the case.
