Delhi: Lodi-era tomb used as RWA office in Defence Colony now protected monument

On May 16, an assurance was given by the archaeology department that by July 23, the next date of hearing, the gazette notification will be issued

A 700-year-old Lodi-era monument in Defence Colony, south Delhi, used illegally as an office by the local residents’ welfare association for more than six decades, has been notified as a protected monument by the Delhi government, bringing to a close the efforts undertaken by the Supreme Court for the revival of the ancient structure.

The RWA signboard on the Gumti of Shaikh Ali in Defence Colony in November 2024. (RAJ K RAJ /HT PHOTO)

On May 16, when the case was last heard by the top court, an assurance was given by the Delhi government’s archaeology department that by July 23, the next date of hearing, the gazette notification will be issued.

The notification issued on June 11 under Section 4 of The Delhi Ancient and Historical Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 2004, said, “The Government of the National Capital Territory of Delhi in pursuance to the directions of Supreme Court of India…hereby declares the Gumti of Shaikh Ali monument specified in the Schedule and Site Plan annexed hereto, to be a protected monument in exercise of the powers conferred by the Section 4 of The Delhi Ancient and Historical Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 2004.”

The notification declares a 50-metre area from the protected monument to be “prohibited” where no permanent structure or activity is possible, and a further area of 100 metres beyond it as “restricted” where any construction/mining activity will require concerned authority’s permission.

Perhaps, these restrictions would have weighed with the Defence Colony Welfare Association (DCWA), which never was in support of declaring the monument as protected. Since the 1960s, DCWA operated its office from inside the heritage building. In 2004, the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) issued a notification intending to declare the structure as a protected monument. But the plan was dropped due to the RWA’s objections.

In this backdrop, a public spirited person, Rajeev Suri, a resident of Defence Colony, filed a petition before the Delhi high court in 2018, providing evidence to show that the “Gumti” was a valuable part of Delhi’s history mentioned in the survey of monuments of Delhi carried out in the 1920s by Maulvi Zafar Hasan, the then deputy superintending archaeologist. This was published in 1926 by ASI as “Last of Muhammadan and Hindu Monuments”.

Suri’s petition was dismissed by the high court on February 20, 2019, after which he approached the apex court. Suri told the court that the structure was mentioned in a 1999 publication of the Indian National Trust for Art and Cultural Heritage (INTACH) describing the Gumti as an octagonal tomb having arched opening and domical superstructure with pointed arch designs on all eight sides of the wall. A circular drum supports the dome and an inverted lotus structure is present above the dome.

In August 2024, the matter took a serious turn when the court directed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to hold a preliminary enquiry into the “turn of events” and the “bonafides” of ASI and the Centre to drop its proposal on declaring the Gumti as a monument of national importance.

The probe revealed that on February 9, 2004, the Centre issued a gazette notification giving notice of its intention to declare the Gumti to be of national importance under Section 4(1) of the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958. Objections were invited to which DCWA responded. The objections were considered by the superintending archaeologist, ASI (Delhi Circle). He wrote to the ASI director general that DCWA has its office in the monument and had carried out “alterations” and “additions” that led to the Gumti losing its originality.

The top court deputed an independent expert, Swapna Liddle, in November to study the extent of the damage to the monument and suggest its restoration. Admittedly, the building was a Grade 1 Heritage building according to the Delhi government’s own records maintained by the Urban Development Department.

In an order passed on January 21, 2025, the court said, “The historical and archaeological importance of this site is an admitted fact. We are of the opinion that this site must be preserved and if need be, restored.”

By the same order, DCWA was directed to vacate the premises and the court appointed senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan as court commissioner to oversee the handing over of the site to the Land and Development Office (L&DO) under the Union government. DCWA had to pay a compensation of ₹40 lakh for its illegal occupation of the historical structure.

On February 18, the Delhi government’s archaeology department informed the court of its intention to “preserve and restore” the monument. The court directed the department to begin the process of declaring the monument “protected”. It also clarified that the failed attempt made earlier by the Centre shall not come in the way of the Delhi government to take a decision under the Delhi Act of 2004.

Sankaranarayanan, in his status reports, apprised the court that the area around the monument also required to be cleared of encroachment by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD), which had a full-fledged office running adjacent to the Gumti along with an illegal parking space given by MCD to a contractor, whose contract had expired long ago. The court came down hard on the civic agency and cleared the premises of any further occupation.

While a piece of the Capital’s heritage is now in protected hands, there are similar other structures in the Capital begging for protection. Senior advocate Shikhil Suri, who argued the matter for the petitioner in the top court, said, “The court’s positive intervention in the matter has set a precedent for citizens across the country to take the first step in reviving similar historical structures that form part of our heritage. The gazette notification to protect Gumti of Shaikh Ali is a testimony to this fact.”