The High Court, however, said it had adequate power under Article 226 of the Constitution to issue the directions that it had in its 2021 order.
It also said that at the time of passing the order, the Court had taken into account the reports and opinions of experts, UNESCO recommendations, and the reports of the amicus curiae appointed in the case.
It further said that the State had, back then, agreed to protect temples with heritage value and it cannot now be permitted to have a change of heart.
The Court further said that the definitions of words such as ‘building’, ‘heritage building’, ‘monuments of heritage importance’ etc., found in Section 2 of the TN Heritage Commission Act were exhaustive enough to include temples within their ambit.
Source: Barandbench
