AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Markandey Katju, C.J.—This writ petition has been filed against the impugned order dated 11-10-2004 passed by the first Respondent.
Admittedly, there is a right of appeal under Rule 37 of the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Rules, 1959 (in short ''the Rules''), which reads as follows:
Appeal.-Any person aggrieved by an order of the Director-General made under Rule 35 or Rule 36 may prefer an appeal to the Central Government; and the decision of that Government on such appeal shall be final.
Under Section 2(e) of The Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958, the powers of the Director General of Archaeology have been delegated to the Superintendent of Archaeology, who passed the impugned order. Hence, the writ-Petitioner has an alternative remedy of appeal under Rule 37 of the rules. If and when the writ-Petitioner files the appeal, we hope and trust that the same will be decided very expeditiously in accordance with law. We further clarify that unless and until the impugned order is set aside or modified in appeal, the terms and conditions contained therein shall be strictly complied with.
The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed. Connected WVMP Nos. 974 and 975 of 2005 and WPMP Nos. 9789 and 9790 of 2005 are closed.