Last week, the newly elected Chief Minister, C. Joseph Vijay, went walkabout at Fort St. George. Which is a good thing. He must be the first Chief Minister in living memory who went and saw some of the monuments in the precinct. The itinerary was predictable – the Church of St. Mary’s and the Fort Museum. But what was left out was what he really needed to go and see. And had he done so, he may have begun pondering over what can be done to save this historic enclave from its steady decline.

The first problem that faces the Fort is its poor general upkeep. Tonnes of rubbish lurk behind the massive walls – the byproducts of the administrative setup at the place. You don’t need to go looking for it. All around, you will see heaps of plastic, paper, and other discarded items. Go closer to the walls, and you will see a lot more. Go to the rear of the Fort and you will see the moat in all its ghastly (lack of) upkeep. Weeds, stagnant water, and refuse on both sides. This is not to be confused with the front side of the fort, where the moat is regularly tended to, but is bone dry.

Ownership tussle

The next is the conflict of multiple ownership. The Fort has five owners, as far as I know. There is the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), and there are the Legislative Assembly, the Tamil Nadu government, the Army, and the Navy. Each has its private turf and guards it fiercely – not by way of protecting the buildings within, but more in terms of recognised bounds. Thus, the Navy had, what is known for some mysterious reason, as Clive’s Library. Years ago, a tree began growing out of it, and nobody noticed it until it took on a stranglehold of the building itself. It is quite certain that the tree, unlike the beanstalk in the fairytale, did not grow overnight and yet, no steps were taken to remove it. Finally, the tree crushed the building for good.

If that is the Navy’s record, the Army fares marginally better. It has taken good care of some buildings, such as the Embarkation HQ. However, the King’s Barracks, said to be the largest in the country, is in a state of near collapse. This is because the Army and the ASI are at loggerheads over control of the building. The ASI wants the Army to hand it over, and the latter is reluctant, given the former’s track record of suddenly denotifying structures under its control, handing them over to the State government for demolition, and putting up new buildings in their place. As a result, King’s Barracks is a shabby, roofless shell.

The Army is not wrong in the doubts it entertains. The ASI has, of course, done a stellar job in restoring Clive’s House (now the ASI HQ) and the church. But the rest of the Fort is littered with episodes where more could have been done. Even in the 1980s, an entire section of historic buildings was denotified to allow the government to build Namakkal Kavignar Maligai. That structure itself would have never been permitted in a precinct of this kind, if we had had a Heritage Act in place. Then came the wilful neglect of Wellesley’s House and Last House on Snob’s Alley, both of which were allowed to collapse. Their ‘protected status’ was subsequently withdrawn.

Which leaves us with the historic gates. Of these, the Sea Gate and the more ornamental entry and departure points are well taken care of. St. Thomas’ Gate, under Army supervision, is good, but the remaining, namely Wallajah, St. George’s, and North, are in very poor repair. The spaces under the arches serve as rubbish tips and the gates themselves are in a state of severe wear and tear.

The buildings under government ownership, namely the Secretariat and Assembly, seem in good condition because of use and regular maintenance. But once you step inside, you see so many mindless additions and renovations that the place has lost all vestige of its antiquity.

In short, the Fort is not what it should be.

What must be done

The new government needs to address the issue of ownership and if that is insurmountable, it should institute a committee of all stakeholders who can at least oversee preservation and maintenance. The Fort premises must be better documented and have signage at significant spots to highlight history. Access must be made easier, and at least from dawn to dusk. The present government timings are a deterrent, given our weather conditions. And lastly, why not a sound and light show on Parade Square? Most forts of India now have this facility. And so, why not Fort St. George?

(Sriram V. is a writer and historian.)

Published – May 27, 2026 08:00 am IST

The demolition of the 17th-century Mubarak Manzil, a Mughal heritage site, by an Agra-based builder, has sparked outrage among many, including famed India-based Scottish historian William Dalrymple.

The razing of Mubarak Manzil in Agra, in collusion with police and administrative officials, speaks volumes about the sad state of ancient monuments and archaeological sites in our country.

It has been reported that apart from Mubarak Manzil, at least three other historical sites were demolished or naturally destroyed in the past four months in Agra. These included the Shahi Hammam (1620), Zohra Bagh, and a 500-year-old Ibrahim Lodhi-era mosque.

A flabbergasted Dalrymple posted: “It’s almost as if India is going out of its way to destroy its appeal as a tourist destination. Neglect your main heritage centres, allow developers to raze all its heritage properties, and then be surprised when this great country has fewer tourists than Dubai or Singapore…”

India, one of the oldest civilisations in the world, has a treasure trove of ancient heritage monuments and sites that date back centuries. These monuments stand as a testament to the architectural brilliance of their respective eras and provide a glimpse into India’s rich cultural heritage.

Dalrymple is right when he says that despite having a rich cultural heritage, India is attracting fewer international tourists as the country is neglecting its heritage monuments.

Lost Glory

We proudly showcase world-renowned monuments and sites like the Taj Mahal in Agra or, for example, Hampi in Karnataka to tourists. However, behind these few well-preserved monuments lie a slew of numerous heritage structures and sites in a dilapidated condition – unaccounted for, destroyed, and lost forever.

According to the Ministry of Culture website, as of January 2025, India has more than 3,696 ancient monuments and archaeological sites of national importance. These monuments are protected and maintained by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI).

The ASI is responsible for the research, conservation, and maintenance of these monuments under the AMASR (Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains) Act, 1958. The Act protects monuments and sites that are more than 100 years old.

An array of structures, including prehistoric sites, Stone Age rock shelters, Neolithic sites, megalithic burial sites, rock-cut caves, stupas, temples, mosques, tombs, churches, cemeteries, forts, palaces, step-wells, and ancient mounds and sites, form part of these monuments. Further, state governments and union territories have also declared monuments/sites as being of state importance under their respective Acts.

In the event of any damage or encroachment to a monument, ASI officials are authorised to file police complaints, issue show-cause notices for the removal of encroachments, and coordinate with the local administration for necessary action. Sadly, the officials have failed in their duty to preserve, protect, and conserve these monuments. So much so that some monuments have gone missing from the ASI’s list.

In a submission made to Parliament by the Ministry of Culture, it was reported that 50 of India’s 3,693 centrally protected monuments were ‘missing’. This was revealed in the submissions made by the ministry on December 8, 2022, to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Transport, Tourism, and Culture as part of a report titled ‘Issues Relating to Untraceable Monuments and Protection of Monuments in India’. These included 11 in Uttar Pradesh, two each in Delhi and Haryana, and some in states like Assam, West Bengal, Arunachal Pradesh, and Uttarakhand.

Among the old sites that had vanished according to the ASI were the Kos Minar, a medieval milestone in Haryana state; the Guns of Emperor Sher Shah in Tinsukia town; the Telia Nala Buddhist site in Varanasi; and the Barakhamba Monument, a 14th-century tomb building in Delhi. Interestingly, all these monuments had been earlier de-notified by the ASI.

Safeguarding Heritage

The ASI and the Ministry of Culture have erred by de-notifying some of these structures, meaning they are no longer classified as monuments of national importance. This has placed them in the dangerous reach of unscrupulous land developers and construction mafias looking for spaces to build, sell, and profit.

There are not enough security guards to oversee these monuments. The Parliamentary Committee (PC) was informed that security guards were posted at only 248 of the 3,693 monuments. “The committee notes with dismay that out of the total requirement of 7,000 personnel for the protection of monuments, the government could provide only 2,578 security personnel at 248 locations due to budgetary constraints,” the PC report said.

In the just-concluded winter session, the government informed Parliament that a survey undertaken by the ASI through its various field offices revealed that 18 protected monuments and sites were “not in good state of preservation”.

The government needs to address the specific challenges faced by the ASI in the upkeep of monuments.

The ASI needs to be provided with sufficient funds, personnel, and resources to maintain these heritage monuments. The local community around historical sites must also be involved in their upkeep and maintenance. A sense of pride and awareness should be instilled in the local community.

In a country where meeting the basic needs of citizens has become the primary focus of successive central governments, many monuments and sites have perished due to activities like urbanisation, the construction of dams and reservoirs, and even encroachments. A number of cases regarding unauthorised constructions carried out in prohibited and regulated areas in various states and UTs have also been highlighted.

Sadly, citizens often seek ways to circumvent the procedures for quick solutions, damaging the sites and structures. On November 27, an IIT researcher was killed in a pit collapse at the Harappan historical site of Lothal, Gujarat. The joint team of IIT Delhi and IIT Gandhinagar was carrying out a soil sample survey and hadn’t bothered to inform or seek permission from the ASI. The digging was carried out within the 100-metre prohibited limit of an ASI-protected site. The researchers even had an excavator working on a nearby road project to dig a 12-foot-deep trench, just 50 metres from the main gate of the Lothal site, which falls within the prohibited area.

Each monument and even the remains narrate a story of India’s glorious past, and they must be preserved as a legacy for future generations.

(The author is Contributing Editor, NDTV)

Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author

New Delhi:

A parliamentary panel has underlined that a large number of historical monuments are “not under any sort of protection” and asked about the procedure through which requests for restoration of “unprotected monuments” is made to the ASI.

It also asked how many such requests are pending before the central body.

The action taken report on recommendations or observations of the committee contained in its 340th Report on Demands for Grants (2023-24) of Ministry of Culture by the department-related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Transport, Tourism and Culture, was presented in the Rajya Sabha and laid on the table of the Lok Sabha on Thursday.

The panel has noted that under the head “Restoration of Unprotected Monuments – Minor Works”, the culture ministry has been allocated Rs 2.5 crore in the 2023-24 Budget Estimate against a projected demand of Rs 5 crore to meet anticipated expenditure for restoration of unprotected monuments such as Badrinath.

“It is submitted in this connection that ASI (Archaeological Survey of India) undertakes restoration of unprotected monuments, subject to the overall criticality/importance of the monument and as per manpower availability with ASI. The budget allocation of Rs 2.5 crore for restoration of unprotected monuments is considered sufficient in respect of presently ongoing work at Badrinath temple,” the ministry informed the panel.

The report said the committee wanted to know about the quantum of ongoing work at the Badrinath temple and the expected timeline of its completion. The panel would like to elicit the information regarding the expenditure made out of the total fund till date.

In its 294th Report on Development and Conservation of Museums and Archaeological sites – Challenges and Opportunities, the committee noted that in 2007, the National Mission on Monuments & Antiquities aimed to list 5,00,000 (five lakh) heritage buildings, it added.

“The committee notes that about 3,693 monuments fall under the protection of the central government while around 4,500 monuments are protected by the state/Union Territory governments. It is evident that a large number of valuable historical monuments are presently not under any sort of protection by the government,” the panel said in the report.

The ministry informed the panel that the “ASI evaluates the proposal following due procedures and accordingly undertakes conservation/preservation of other than ASI heritage buildings”.

The ASI was established in 1861 and currently operates through a number of circles across the country.

The panel further said it would like to “know the expenditure incurred by the Ministry on the restoration of unprotected monuments in the country by the ASI during the last three years, year-wise”.

“The committee further desires to know the procedure through which request for restoration of unprotected monuments is made to ASI, and how many such requests are pending before the ASI, at present,” it added.

In the report, the committee further said that it would like to “know the criteria governing the recognition of a monument that requires any kind of protection”.

The committee also wants to know “how categorisation of monuments is being effected for its protection at central/state level”.

On the panel’s observation that the Rs 5 crore sought by the ASI for the restoration of unprotected monuments is in itself a “minor amount given the huge number of such monuments”, the ministry has said, “As stated in the preceding ATN, ASI undertakes restoration of unprotected monuments subject to the overall criticality/importance of the monument and as per manpower availability with the ASI. Although the current allocation is considered to be sufficient, additional budget requirements as and when the need arises will be demanded from the Ministry of Culture.” 

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)