VENKATACHALIAH, J. - (1.)This petition under Art.226 of the Constitution raises an interesting question as to the scope of the Karnataka Ancient and Historical Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1961 ('Act' for short). Petitioner seek a mandamus to the State Government to consider and dispose of their representation dt. 10-4-1983 as to the question of declaring the 'Attara Cutcherry', a Government building in which the Karnataka High Court is housed, as a "Protected monument" under S.4 of the said Act. The petition is filed as sequel to the Government Order No. DPAR/188/SHC/82 dt. 24-3-1982 which has accorded administrative approval for the demolition of the existing 'Attara Cutcherry' and for the construction of a new High Court Building on the site. This petition is before us on its reference to a Division Bench by Swami, J.
(2.)Petitioners in their efforts to avert the demolition of this ancient building, which they cherish as a cultural-heritage and as an enduring source of enrichment of the environmental beauty and cultural-tone of the City of Bangalore, now appeal to the provisions of the 'Act'. They have also challenged the decision of Government as an arbitrary decision uninformed by relevant considerations.
(3.)The State of Karnataka, Respondent-1, has opposed this petition and has sought to justify its decision as one arrived at after a careful consideration of all factors relevant to the decision. It has also contended that petitioners cannot be considered aggrieved parties and have no standing to sue, and that, at all events, they have no enforceable rights under the 'Act' entitling them to any relief. The Director of Archaeology, Government of Karnataka and the Bangalore Urban Art Commission, an authority constituted under S.51 of the Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976, are, respectively, Respondents-2, and 3 Respondents 4 to 36 are Advocates of this Court who have impleaded themselves in these proceedings. They oppose the petition.