Odisha HC adjourns Srimandir listening to to May 16
By Express News Service
CUTTACK: The Orissa High Court on Thursday couldn’t proceed with the PIL looking for intervention in opposition to the constructions occurring close to the Jagannath temple complicated beneath the Puri Heritage Corridor Project because the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) didn’t file a reply to it. Dilip Kumar Baral, a resident of Puri city filed the petition elevating a dispute over the constructions on the bottom that they’re being carried out inside 75 metres of the temple.
The Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains (AMASR) Act prohibits any new development inside 100 metres of the temple, the petition identified, expressing apprehensions that the constructions could pose menace to the temple.
On April 8, the courtroom sought reply within the type of an affidavit from ASI because it was the custodian of the twelfth century shrine, a Centrally protected monument. The ASI was directed to file the affidavit by April 18. But when the petition got here up on Thursday the Assistant Solicitor General of India, Prasanna Kumar Parhi appeared on behalf of the ASI and acknowledged that extra time is required to file an in depth affidavit.
The petitioner counsel Anup Kumar Mohapatra sought interim orders, however the courtroom refused to proceed with the PIL until the ASI makes its stand clear on the dispute raised within the petition. The division bench of Chief Justice S Muralidhar and Justice RK Pattanaik adjourned the matter to May 16 for listening to whereas granting two weeks’ time to ASI to file the reply. “It will be open to the ASI to take a joint inspection of the construction activities going on in the Jagannath temple complex area after advance information to the temple authorities,” the bench stated in its order.
On April 8, the Advocate General AK Parija, showing on behalf of the State authorities and Shree Jagannath Temple Administration had acknowledged that the National Monument Authority (NMA) had issued a no objection certificates (NOC) for the constructions. The constructions included a cloak room, mini cloak room, sevayat room, bathrooms, shelter pavilion, pavement space together with place for standing in a queue.
Questions raised over Assembly committee not assembly
Bhubaneswar: Amid raging controversy over development work for the Puri heritage hall challenge, questions are being raised on the meeting committee headed by Speaker Surjya Narayan Patro as its assembly just isn’t being convened but. Statement of the Speaker on the problem on Thursday signifies {that a} assembly of the committee is unlikely to be referred to as within the close to future. Patro stated there isn’t a drawback in calling a gathering of the committee, however the matter is within the courtroom. He stated a dialogue with the Law division is on to analyse the state of affairs and discover out whether or not it’s potential for the home committee to intervene in a matter which is sub-judice. Earlier, a number of instances the Speaker had prevented the problem of calling a gathering of the committee by stating that he’ll focus on the matter with the Works division. However, a senior member of the committee stated there isn’t a bar on the meeting committee assembly even when the matter is sub-judice. The members can even go to the location to take inventory of the state of affairs, he stated. The state authorities had agreed to represent an meeting committee headed by the Speaker on March 30 following strain from the Opposition events. Parliamentary affairs minister Bikram Keshari Arukha had stated the committee will examine the challenge round Srimandir.
