NBCC (INDIA) LIMITED Vs. AMAN LEKHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal under Clause X of the Letters Patent Appeal preferred by the NBCC (India) Limited seeks to assail the order dtd. 21/12/2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No.3263/2014. Vide the impugned order, the appellant's application being CM APPL.53719/2022 seeking correction of a purported factual error in the judgment dtd. 11/2/2021, wherein it had been recorded that the Dariya Khan Tomb was located in an area of 14 acres, has been dismissed by the learned Single Judge.

(2.) In support of the appeal, learned senior counsel for the appellant submits that when the decision dtd. 11/2/2021 was rendered, the appellant itself was unaware that the area of Dariya Khan Tomb was only 1.25 acres as against 14 acres recorded in the said decision. However, when documents including copies of the notification issued as far back as in October, 1925 showing that the actual area of Dariya Khan Tomb was only 1.25 acres, came to its knowledge, the appellant approached the learned Single Judge, by way of an application seeking correction of the aforesaid factual error qua the area of Dariya Khan Tomb and also prayed for consequential modification of directions issued in the judgment dtd. 11/2/2021.

(3.) He submits that the learned Single Judge has, however, dismissed the said application by granting liberty to the appellant to approach the Archaeological Survey of India ('ASI') by observing that in case the appellant is of the opinion that the area required to be declared as prohibited area under Sec. 20A of the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958 qua the Dariya Khan Tomb, was in fact less than 14 acres, it was open for the appellant to approach the ASI for proper determination thereof. This observation of the learned Single Judge, he contends clearly shows that the learned Single Judge was also conscious of the fact that the grievance of the appellant was that there was a factual error in the recording of the area of Dariya Khan Tomb. The learned Single Judge, however, instead of taking cognizance of the documents filed alongwith the application which would have clearly showed that the area of Dariya Khan Tomb i.e. the protected area was only 1.25 acres, has left the appellant to again approach the ASI. He, therefore, prays that the impugned order be set aside by clarifying that the protected area of the Dariya Khan Tomb was only 1.25 acres.