[ad_1]
British Governor General Yale built the tomb after burying his four-year-old son Jaka David Elihu Yale and his friend Joseph Hemer.
The Madras High Court on Friday directed the Central government to produce a 1921 notification according to which a 17th century British tomb now situated in the high court campus was declared a protected monument under the Preservation of Monuments Act, 1904.
A special bench comprising Justices M. Sundar and N. Sathish Kumar gave Solicitor General R. Rajesh Vivekananthan two weeks time to file a copy of the over a century-old notice as it is at the core of the court proceedings.
The direction came following a third-party writ appeal filed by senior advocate T. Mohan challenging a single judge’s order dated June 27, 2023, seeking to shift the mausoleum, built by Elihu Yale, the governor of Madras between 1687 and 1692, out of the high court campus.
Sriram Panchu, the lawyer representing the appellants, questioned the jurisdiction of the single judge to issue such an order. He argued that the mausoleum had a very interesting history connecting India, Britain and the United States and therefore should not be disturbed.
He said the prestigious Yale University, one of the eight Ivy League schools in the United States, was named after British Governor General Yale, who built the tomb after burying his four-year-old son Jaka David Elihu Yale and friend Joseph Hemmer.
On 20 January 1921, the mausoleum, which consists of an obelisk built over a burial chamber, was declared a protected monument under the 1904 Act. After independence, the mausoleum continued to be protected under the Antiquities and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958.
Mr Pancho also pointed out to the court that Yale University and Tamil Nadu also have links with former Chief Minister CN Annadurai, who was a recipient of the university’s highly-regarded Chubb Scholarship and was invited to address the university in 1968.
He said lawyer B. Manoharan, who filed the writ petition before the single judge, had absolutely no personal interest in the matter and the petition was filed purely in public interest as the lawyer wanted the land to be used for constructing a multi-storey car park in the court campus.
The senior lawyer said if the case was filed in public interest, then as per rules, it should be heard by a division bench of the high court and not by a single judge. He also pointed out that the writ applicants have not sought to quash the 1921 notification.
Mr. Panchu, reading out the petitioners’ plea before the single judge, said the litigants were only seeking a declaration that Yale’s mausoleum was not an ancient monument. Such a declaration could not be sought without questioning the validity of the 1921 notification, the senior lawyer said.
After hearing Mr. Panchu for some time, the judges felt that it was necessary for them to peruse the 1921 notification before proceeding to hear Mr. Mohan’s appeal and another appeal filed by the Ministry of Culture challenging the single judge’s order.
Besides appealing twice, Mr Mohan also filed a lawsuit against the proposal to build a five-storey court building near the mausoleum. In the lawsuit, he also insisted on a planned development of the high court complex instead of haphazard construction of the building.
[ad_2]
Source link
