SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Before:- B.N. Kirpal, R.C. Lahoti and K.G. Balakrishnan, JJ.

Writ Petition(Civil) No. 653 of 1994 with W.P(C) No. 455 of 1996, W.P.(C) No. 239 of 1997. D/d. 26.11.2001.

Wasim Ahmed Saeed - Petitioner

Versus

Union of India and others - Respondent

For the Petitioner in WP 653 of 94 :- Mr. Manmohan, Mr. S. Sukumaran, Adv. for M/s J.B. Dadachanji & Co., Advocates.

For the Petitioner in WPs 455 of 96 and 239 of 97 :- Mr. Imtiaz Ahmad, Ms. Naghma Imtiaz, Mr. R D Upadhyay, Advocates.

For the Petitioner in CP 162 of 2000 :- Mr. Anis Suhrawardy, Advocate.

For the Respondent UOI/ ASI :- Mr. Harish N Salve, Solicitor General, Mr. N.N. Goswwami, Sr. Adv., Mr. Tara Chandra Sharma, Mr. C V Subba Rao, Mr. Krishan Mahajan, Mr. Krishan Venugopal, Mr. B. Krishna Prasad, Ms. Sushma Suri, Ms. Hema Srinivasan, Mr. B.V. Balaram Das and Mr. P. Parmeswaran, Advocates.

For the State of UP :- Mr. A.B. Rohtagi, Sr. Adv. , Mr. R.C. Verma, Mr. Mukesh Verma, and Ms. Kiran Kapoor, Mr. Ajay K Agarwal, Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, Mr. S K Verma, Mr. Prashant Chaudhary, Mr. Shakil Ahmed Syed, Mr. Irshad Ahmad, Ms. Madhur Dadlani, Mr. Satish K. Agnihotri, Mr. Maninder Singh, Mr. Ashok K Srivastava, Advocates.

Constitution of India, 1950, Article 32 - Public Interest Litigation - Report of Archaeological Survey of India which was submitted to declare and made Fatehpur Sikri a Heritage City accepted by State of U.P - Plan indicating the time within which the report would be implemented directed to be prepared by Union of India and State of U.P.

[Para 2]

JUDGMENT

B.N. Kirpal, J. - An affidavit has been filed on behalf of the State of U.P. which indicates that the State has accepted the Report of the Archaeological Survey of India which has been submitted in an effort to declare and make Fatehpur Sikri a Heritage City.

2. Copies of the suggestion of the State of U.P. given in this affidavit should now be considered by the Union of India for implementation. For this purpose, the Ministries of Urban Development and Culture, Union of India as well as the State of U.P. should prepare and draft a plan indicating the time within which the report will be implemented. In preparing this plan, the views of the WAKF Board and the Archaeological Survey of India should also be considered. Learned Solicitor General states that the final plan for implementation so drawn will be filed in court within eight weeks from today. List thereafter.

.