Overlapping of authority with Waqf boards hampers conservation: ASI

The Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) has raised serious concerns about overlapping of its authority with that of various Waqf boards over the control of 50-odd protected monuments across the country — which are mainly tombs and mosques with prominent ones being Mughal emperor Aurangzeb and his wife Dilras Banu Begum’s tombs (both in Aurangabad, Maharashtra) — which hampers their protection and conservation work as lots of commercial activities are undertaken by Waqf bodies in and around such structures.

Sources aware of the development pointed out that due to the dual authority status of several such monuments, administrative conflicts arise, with ASI alleging that Waqf members unilaterally take decisions which obstruct their conservation activities.

ASI has also alleged that Waqf representatives indulge in commercial activities inside and outside such protected monuments owing to overlapping control of both the institutions, which leads to their damage and loss of heritage.

Deposing before the joint committee on Waqf (Amendment) Bill, the ASI authorities flagged a series of concerns which arise due to the overlapping of authority over several such protected monuments.

The ASI officials informed the parliamentary panel that while it has all the records of these 50-odd monuments (an indicative list of which it shared with the MPs and a copy of which is with The Tribune) regarding which year they were declared as protected monuments, the respective Waqf boards have failed to produce records of years when these very structures were declared as Waqf properties.

In fact, out of the 50-odd list of such monuments (where there is duality of authority), around 20-odd of them don’t have records regarding when they were declared as Waqf properties.

Allowing unauthorised persons for photography and guide work without authority, taking up construction, additions or alterations in violation of AMASR Act 1958, facilitating commercial activities and operation of Madarsa and worship activities are some of the activities allowed by Waqf boards in such protected monuments, which the ASI flagged with the panel.

In monuments like Atala Masjid in Uttar Pradesh’s Jaunpur, the representatives of Waqf have taken up activities even after opposition by ASI staff. Also, a Muttawalli has occupied a room within the complex of Dharhara Masjid at Varanasi, the ASI officials told the parliamentary panel.

In some cases, even entry of ASI staff is restricted in certain parts of a monument on the pretext of privacy. Sometimes, Waqf claim their ownership over the monument, which leads to management issues, the ASI further pointed out.

Moreover, the ASI also contended before the panel that while it had come into existence in 1861, the Waqf Act came only in 1995.

Also, the subsequent legislations of ASI came into force much before the Waqf legislation was enacted, ASI officials told the parliamentary panel members, pointing out that the protection of monuments and sites commenced with coming into force of The Ancient Monuments Preservation Act, 1904. Various monuments are declared protected under the Act of 1904.

After India’s independence, the concept of national importance came into effect and all monuments declared protected under the Act of 1904 were given status of ‘Monument of National Importance’ by the Ancient and Historical Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains (Declaration of National Importance) Act, 1951. Thereafter, a fresh act came into effect as the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958 or the AMASR Act.

In contrast, the Waqf Act, 1995 provides power to the board to declare any property or building as a Waqf. In exercise of such power, in several cases, the Waqf boards have issued notifications (in later dates) declaring protected monuments as ‘Waqf Property’ which results in conflict in exercise of powers delegated under the AMASR Act, 1958, the ASI said in its presentation before the panel.

Commercial activity causes damage

The ASI has also alleged that Waqf representatives indulge in commercial activities inside and outside such protected monuments owing to overlapping control of both institutions, which leads to damage and loss of heritage