AMASRA: 2.38 Section 20-O. Bar of jurisdiction of civil court.

2.38 Bar of jurisdiction of civil court

2.38.1 Bare Act Provision:

20-O. Bar of jurisdiction of civil court.―No civil court shall have jurisdiction in respect of any matter which the Authority is empowered by or under this Act to determine and no injunction shall be granted by any court or other authority in respect of any action taken or to be taken in pursuance of any power conferred by or under this Act.

Footnote:

1. Ins. by Act 10 of 2010, s. 4 (w.e.f. 16-6-1992).

2.38.2 Bar of Jurisdiction of Civil Court

As per Section 20-O of the AMASR Act, civil courts cannot interfere in decisions made by the National Monuments Authority (NMA) under the AMASR Act, nor can they issue orders to stop actions taken by the NMA or others under the Act’s authority.[1] This provision protects the NMA’s specialized authority in heritage protection by preventing civil court interference, ensuring efficient and consistent implementation of the AMASR Act without delays from litigation.

Excluding judicial review risks unaccountable decisions, limiting recourse for legal errors or unfairness. Stakeholders, e.g., property owners, may be unable to challenge rights-affecting decisions, leading to perceptions of unfairness. The section does not address court intervention for fundamental rights issues, risking constitutional challenges. Prohibiting injunctions could allow harmful actions to proceed during disputes, risking monument damage. Without court oversight, the NMA could make arbitrary decisions, reducing public trust. No alternative mechanism for disputes leaves affected parties without clear remedies.

Reference:

[1] “Report of the Select Committee on The Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains (Amendment) Bill, 2018”, Rajya Sabha Secretariat, New Delhi, February, 2019/Magha, 1940 (Saka)