Temples

Administrative Lex, Procedural Lex, Temple Lex

Boundaries of Public Welfare versus Heritage Preservation in India: Pataleshwar Caves Pune Case Part 2

The most critical point was the interpretation of Section 2(dc) of the Act. The court reasoned that the grade separator, which is an underpass set up to obviate traffic congestion and air pollution, constitutes a “facility for the public or a convenience for the public at large.” Since the statutory definition of “construction” in Section 2(dc) specifically excludes the provision of facilities of this nature for the public, the PMC’s work could not be regarded as prohibited construction under the Act.

, , , , ,

Boundaries of Public Welfare versus Heritage Preservation in India: Pataleshwar Caves Pune Case Part 2 Read Post »

Administrative Lex, Procedural Lex, Temple Lex

Boundaries of Public Welfare versus Heritage Preservation in India: Pataleshwar Caves Pune Case Part 1

The NMA called upon Deccan College Pune to furnish an Archaeological and Heritage related impact assessment report along with proposed mitigating measures. PMC made a presentation to the NMA on April 25, 2013, and subsequently provided clarifications on May 7, 2013, to address the observations made by the Authority members.

, , , , ,

Boundaries of Public Welfare versus Heritage Preservation in India: Pataleshwar Caves Pune Case Part 1 Read Post »

Scroll to Top