Cannot Sit As Appellate Body To Set Aside Opinion Of Experts: Karnataka HC Rejects PIL Challenging Demolition Of Heritage Buildings In Mysuru
The Karnataka High Court while dismissing the petition challenging demolition of heritage buildings in Mysuru has held that it cannot sit as an appellate body in writ jurisdiction to set aside the opinion of experts.
The Court observed this in a PIL (Public Interest Litigation) filed against the respondents (authorities) to refrain from demolishing or reconstructing Devraja Market building and Lansdowne Building of Mysore city. The petitioners asserted that such buildings are heritage buildings under Section 2(1ea) of the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act, 1951 in view of their classification as heritage building in the Master Plan – 2031 for Mysore – Nanjangud Local Planning Area.
A Division Bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B. Varale and Justice M.G.S. Kamal said, “Considering all the above aspects and also the fact that a portion of Devaraja Market building was collapsed while carrying on restoration activity and the probable danger to market, we are of the opinion that this Court cannot sit as an appellate body in writ jurisdiction to set aside the opinion of the experts. The writ petition, being devoid of any merits, deserves to be dismissed.”
The Bench also said that as per the settled law, when it comes to an issue of consideration of experts' view/opinion, courts of law should be circumspect in showing indulgence, as the courts do not possess the expertise.
Advocate Nidhishree B.V. appeared on behalf of the petitioners while AGA S.S. Mahendra and Advocate Geethadevi M. Papanna appeared on behalf of the respondents.
In this case, the Devaraj Market and Lansdowne Buildings were built during the time of erstwhile Maharaja of Mysore and the said buildings were planned to compliment and complete the setting of Mysore Palace. The petitioners submitted that if buildings were not preserved, the Mysore Palace and Fort would lose much of its setting.
The aforesaid two buildings were 130 years old and a Task Force was constituted which recommended demolition and reconstruction in the original Heritage design. The authorities had contended that due to the poor condition of the buildings, restoration work on them could not be continued and that a portion of the building had also collapsed when restoration was being undertaken. Subsequently, the expert committees recommended that the buildings be demolished. Being aggrieved by this, the petitioners were before the court.
The High Court in the above regard observed, “We are unable to accept this submission for the reason that only experience of ten years will not amount to expertise in the field. … Dr.Syed Shakeeb-Ur-Rahman is possessing Degree of Ph.D at IIT Madras in Structural Engineering. … His profile also shows that the institutes in which he is a member are reputed institutes and majority of them are Governing Councils. He is also a member and panel of experts in one of the renowned institutes in the country namely, All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE). Therefore, it cannot be said that Dr.Syed Shakeeb-Ur-Rahman lacks any experience and as such, he is not an expert in the field.”
The Court noted that the Task Force Committee and Special Heritage Committee were constituted by the Deputy Commissioner prior to its orders with an object that there has to be adequate representation of experts in the field.
“… the members of the Task Force Committee and the Special Heritage Committee are experts in the field such as, Historians, Academicians, Civil Engineers and the persons from Architect field. It is nobody's case that the Deputy Commissioner had not authority to constitute such committee or he has some mala fide intention while constituting these committees”, further noted the Court.
The Court added that such committees were constituted for getting expert opinion in the field who undertook the exercise of spot inspection of Devaraja Market and collected necessary material and thereafter, opined that it will not be advisable to reconstruct the building and the only course open is to demolish the building.
Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the writ petition.
Cause Title- Prof. D. Shrijay Devaraj Urs & Ors. v. The State of Karnataka & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2023:KHC:27924-DB)
