New Delhi – In a development that has reignited the debate over cultural heritage and property rights in India, the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) has revealed that over 120 protected monuments, recognized for their historical significance, are now being contested by various state Waqf Boards. This revelation came to light during a recent session of the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) examining the Waqf Amendment Bill, 2024, leading to a heated exchange among members over the implications of these claims.
The ASI, tasked with the preservation of India’s archaeological heritage, presented a list where several monuments, some declared protected nearly a century ago, are now under the radar of Waqf Boards, which manage properties donated for Muslim religious or charitable purposes. One notable example is the Tomb of Ahmad Shah in Ahmednagar, declared a protected monument by ASI in 1909, yet claimed by the Waqf Board in 2006.
This overlap in jurisdiction has led to administrative complications and conflicts, with ASI officials accusing Waqf Boards of making unauthorized additions or alterations to these monuments, thereby affecting their historical integrity. The ASI’s concerns were not just about physical alterations but also about the broader implications for heritage management and public access to these sites.
Opposition members in the JPC, however, criticized the ASI’s stance, accusing it of spreading misinformation and suggesting that the Waqf Boards’ actions are within the legal framework provided by the Waqf Act, 1995. They argued that the Waqf Boards do not arbitrarily claim properties but follow a process that includes historical evidence of ownership or endowment.
The debate took a sharp turn when discussions veered towards the legal and cultural implications of such claims. Critics of the Waqf Boards’ actions argue that these claims could potentially lead to a change in the character of these monuments, affecting their universal appeal and historical authenticity. Conversely, supporters of the Waqf Boards emphasize the religious and community significance of these sites, arguing for their right to manage these properties under religious freedom and heritage laws.
The ASI’s support for the new Waqf bill, which seeks to redefine the powers of Waqf Boards, has been interpreted by some as an attempt to streamline the management of these contested monuments. However, this has only fueled the controversy, with accusations flying from both sides about misrepresentation and overreach.
This situation underscores a broader issue in India: the intersection of religious, cultural, and legal rights over historical sites. While the ASI aims to preserve these monuments for their historical value, the Waqf Boards assert their rights based on religious endowments and community service. The outcome of this tug-of-war could set a precedent for how India manages its rich tapestry of cultural heritage, balancing preservation with religious and community rights.
As the JPC continues its deliberations, the public watches closely, aware that the decisions made could redefine the landscape of heritage management in India, potentially affecting how future generations connect with their past. This case not only pits heritage against religion but also highlights the complexities of India’s secular fabric where history, faith, and law intersect.
