High Court tryst with heritage-linked concerns not new
The Punjab and Haryana High Court’s recent directive to clear the land near the Rock Garden to ease traffic congestion around the court complex and pave the way for a parking lot has once again placed the judicial institution in the midst of a discussion on heritage preservation.
The order has sparked a debate, but it is by no means an isolated instance. Over the years, the High Court has seen several of its infrastructural and administrative decisions – from the removal of a tapestry to the expansion of courtrooms – intertwining with concerns over Chandigarh’s carefully preserved architectural and environmental legacy.
Courtroom expansion
A controversy erupted during Justice V Ramaswami’s tenure as the Chief Justice between November 1987 and October 1989. It is believed that the then Chief Justice wanted to increase the size of the courtrooms by including the Judges’ chambers in these. He wanted a separate block to be constructed for Judges’ chambers – a move that courted criticism. The then sitting Judges of the High Court wrote to the Prime Minister and finally, the proposal was shelved.
Tapestry removal
In 2004, a “priceless” tapestry designed by Chandigarh’s planner Le Corbusier was removed from the courtroom of the then Chief Justice BK Roy before being stashed away and wrapped in polythene bags.
Information available suggested the tapestry was removed on the Chief Justice’s order. He considered it to be “unhealthy” as it had “a lot of dust”. The move led to an intense coverage by The Tribune and uproar by eminent residents, including Chandigarh’s first Chief Architect MN Sharma, former Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court Justice SS Sodhi, former Chief Justice of Delhi High Court Justice RN Aggarwal and senior advocate Manmohan Lal Sarin. The tapestry was finally put up on a wall in the Chief Justice’s courtroom.
Lawyers’ Chambers on greenbelt
A controversy arose following suggestions to construct chambers for advocates on the “heritage” greenbelt opposite the museum. Justice Sodhi described it as a matter of grave concern. “If the green belt is allowed to be converted into chambers, it will sound the death knell of the planned city of Chandigarh,” Justice Sodhi asserted in a communiqué to the High Court in May 2015.
The letter was taken on record by a Division Bench during the hearing of a petition by the Bar Association against the Chandigarh Administration. The court subsequently asked the UT Adviser to suggest an alternative space.
The green belt is being used as a kutcha parking. The High Court only recently directed the Administration to lay green pavers and plant an adequate number of trees to enhance the green cover, after rejecting the UT’s objection that the area was earmarked as a green belt within the Capitol Complex.
New verandah
Another notable instance was the debate over the construction of a verandah in front of the Chief Justice’s courtroom. The Supreme Court stayed the High Court’s directive of November 29, 2024, to the Chandigarh Administration to construct the verandah. The order came in response to a petition by the Administration, which argued that the construction would jeopardise the UNESCO World Heritage status of the Capitol Complex. Representing the Administration, Solicitor-General Tushar Mehta asserted that altering the iconic building designed by Le Corbusier would compromise its architectural integrity. The Bench was assisted by senior advocate PS Patwalia as amicus curiae. The Bar Association of Punjab and Haryana High Court subsequently sought the recalling of the order.
