AMASRA: 2.9 Section 6. Preservation of protected monument by agreement.

2.9 Preservation of protected monument by agreement

2.9.1 Bare Act Provision:

6. Preservation of protected monument by agreement.―(1) The Collector, when so directed by the Central Government, shall propose to the owner of a protected monument to enter into an agreement with the Central Government within a specified period for the maintenance of the monument.

(2) An agreement under this section may provide for all or any of the following matters, namely:―

(a) the maintenance of the monument;

(b) the custody of the monument and the duties of any person who may be employed to watch it;

(c) the restriction of the owner’s right―

(i) to use the monument for any purpose,

(ii) to charge any fee for entry into, or inspection of, the monument,

(iii) to destroy, remove, alter or deface the monument, or

(iv) to build on or near the site of the monument;

(d) the facilities of access to be permitted to the public or any section thereof or to archaeological officers or to persons deputed by the owner or any archaeological officer or the Collector to inspect or maintain the monument;

(e) the notice to be given to the Central Government in case the land on which the monument is situated or any adjoining land is offered for sale by the owner, and the right to be reserved to the Central Government to purchase such land, or any specified portion of such land, at its market value;

(f) the payment of any expenses incurred by the owner or by the Central Government in connection with the maintenance of the monument;

(g) the proprietary or other rights which are to vest in the Central Government in respect of the monument when any expenses are incurred by the Central Government in connection with the maintenance of the monument;

(h) the appointment of an authority to decide any dispute arising out of the agreement; and

(i) any matter connected with the maintenance of the monument which is a proper subject of agreement between the owner and the Central Government.

(3) The Central Government or the owner may, at any time after the expiration of three years from the date of execution of an agreement under this section, terminate it on giving six months’ notice in writing to the other party:

Provided that where the agreement is terminated by the owner, he shall pay to the Central Government the expenses, if any, incurred by it on the maintenance of the monument during the five years immediately preceding the termination of the agreement or, if the agreement has been in force for a shorter period, during the period the agreement was in force.

(4) An agreement under this section shall be binding on any person claiming to be the owner of the monument to which it relates, from, through or under a party by whom or on whose behalf the agreement was executed.

The Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958 (AMASR Act) in India governs the preservation of protected monuments. Section 6 outlines the process for entering into agreements between the Central Government and owners of protected monuments for their maintenance. Below is a detailed interpretation, explanation of the doctrine, and critical analysis of each sub-section, clause, and sub-clause in simple, precise language.

2.9.2 Proposal for Agreement

Section 6(1) of AMASR Act provides for proposal for agreement. When directed by the Central Government, the Collector must propose to the owner of a protected monument to enter into an agreement with the Central Government.[1] This agreement, to be finalized within a specified period, focuses on the monument’s maintenance. The state has the authority to regulate private property to preserve cultural heritage for public benefit, balancing individual property rights with national interests.[2] This is Doctrine of Public Interest.

2.9.3 Scope of the Agreement

Section 6(2) provides for the scope of the agreement from perspective of AMASR Act. This sub-section lists matters that the agreement may cover, allowing flexibility to address various aspects of monument preservation. Doctrine of Contractual Flexibility can be seen as the agreement is customizable to suit the specific needs of the monument while ensuring legal enforceability. Let us understand each clause in detail.

(a) Maintenance of the Monument: The agreement can specify how the monument will be maintained, such as repairs or conservation efforts. Owners and the government share responsibility to protect cultural heritage, hence Doctrine of Duty of Care is seen in this clause.

(b) Custody and Duties of Watchers: The agreement can define who has custody of the monument and the responsibilities of any personnel (e.g., watchmen) employed to protect it. Delegation of Responsibility which ensures professional oversight of monument protection is backbone of this clause.

(c) Restrictions on Owner’s Rights: The agreement can limit the owner’s ability to use the monument for any purpose (e.g., commercial activities), to charge fees for entry or inspection, to destroy, remove, alter, or deface the monument or to build on or near the monument’s site.[3] Restriction of Property Rights limits private rights to prioritize public heritage preservation.[4]

(d) Public and Official Access: The agreement can specify access rights for the public, archaeological officers, or persons authorized by the owner, Collector, or government to inspect or maintain the monument. Doctrine of Public Access to Heritage enshrined under the clause ensures cultural heritage is accessible for public enjoyment and official oversight.

(e) Notice of Sale and Government’s Right to Purchase: The owner must notify the Central Government if they intend to sell the land where the monument is located or adjacent land. The government reserves the right to purchase the land at market value. The doctrine of Right of Pre-emption protects the state’s interest in maintaining control over heritage sites.

(f) Payment of Maintenance Expenses: The agreement can outline how maintenance expenses are shared between the owner and the Central Government. Here the rule of Shared Financial Responsibility ensures both parties contribute to preservation costs.

(g) Government’s Proprietary Rights: If the Central Government incurs maintenance expenses, it may gain proprietary or other rights over the monument. Doctrine of Equitable Interest ensures the government’s financial contribution and justifies a legal stake in the monument. The extent of “proprietary or other rights” is unclear, potentially allowing the government to claim excessive control over private property.

(h) Dispute Resolution Authority: The agreement can appoint an authority to resolve disputes arising from its terms. Alternative Dispute Resolution promotes efficient resolution of conflicts outside courts.

(i) Other Matters Related to Maintenance: The agreement can include any other matters related to monument maintenance deemed appropriate by both parties. Such Contractual Freedom allows flexibility to address unique circumstances. The open-ended nature of this clause could lead to vague or overly broad terms, creating enforcement challenges or disputes over interpretation.

2.9.4 Termination of Agreement

Section 6(3) provides for the termination of agreement. Either the Central Government or the owner can terminate the agreement after three years by giving six months’ written notice. If the owner terminates, they must reimburse the government for maintenance expenses incurred in the preceding five years or the duration of the agreement if shorter. This gives Freedom to Exit Contracts which ensures parties are not indefinitely bound, with conditions to protect public investment.

But the five-year reimbursement period for owners is burdensome, especially for those with limited financial capacity, and may deter owners from entering agreements. No reciprocal obligation exists for the government to compensate the owner for maintenance contributions if it terminates the agreement. The clause does not address what happens to ongoing maintenance responsibilities post-termination, risking neglect of the monument.

2.9.5 Binding Nature of Agreement

Section 6(4) provides for the binding nature of the agreement. The agreement binds not only the original owner but also any subsequent owners who acquire the monument through or under the original owner. Here Doctrine of Privity of Contract extends contractual obligations to successors to ensure continuity of monument preservation.

Reference:

[1] “Follow-up on the Performance Audit of Preservation and Conservation of Monuments and Antiquities”, Union Government (Civil) Ministry of Culture Report No. 10 of 2022 (Performance Audit), Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India.

[2] “Introduction: Heritage legislation and management”, James K. Reap, Springer Open, available at https://built-heritage.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s43238-022-00059-9, Last visited on 18.07.2025

[3] Archaeological Survey of India Vs. Narendra Anand and others [(2012) 2 SCC -562]

[4] Iqbal Masud Khan vs. Director General, Gujarat High Court in WP (PIL) 214 of 2013, Dt. 8.08.2014 available at https://indiankanoon.org/doc/199652408/, Last visited on Dt. 18.07.2025