INTRODUCTION

" It shall be the duty of every citizen of India to value and preserve the rich heritage of our composite culture" - Article 51 A (F) of the Constitution of India.

The need to preserve Greek ruins as a cultural necessity was recognised by the early Romans, and rules for conservation were established as early as the eighth century AD. However, the practice was not effectively institutionalised by law in European countries until the middle of the nineteenth century, and it is only very recently that the issue has become one of truly international concern. In India, even though we have a very old, and remarkably continuous civilization, the practice of conservation was introduced by Lord Curzon in 1902 with the consolidation of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI). As an issue of wider public and professional concern, however, it is still nascent.

The question, which first of all needs to be addressed, is -What is Conservation? And then, How is it to be made operational, that is -Are we focussing conservation to economic interests or we are respecting the cultural aspect also? The conservation in this context best can be explained as a practice that protects and enhances the cultural value of a building or a monument.

Yet, here once could say that what is emerging in the process is, on the one hand, a clearer definition of the concepts of conservation planning and management, and on the other, an option to reassess our development ideology and model itself. Particularly in India, it is becoming clearer that conservation instead of being a marginal technical activity at odds with the real world as in the West, could, in fact, be central to the definition of our identity.

 Over five hundred centrally- protected monuments for structural conservation, chemical preservation and development have been identified by Archaeological Survey of India under the tenth five-year Plan. The primary interest of this institution was antiquity and authenticity. Even after independence, this colonial legacy continues. As a result, about 5000 monuments alone have been declared as heritage sites. Another equal number of monuments has been identified by various other state departments of archaeology. The Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act of 1958, declares buildings that are 100 years old and above as monuments and provides for their protection. Monuments are frozen or mummified; at times, later additions are removed and the structure is restored to its original/ authentic state of existence.

The main legislations in India that deals with the subject of conservation and protection of our cultural heritage and monuments, within its ambit are as follows:

1.      The Indian Treasure Trove Act, 1878.

2.      The Ancient Monuments Preservation Act, 1904.

3.      The Antiquities (Export Control) Act, 1947

4.      The Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958

5.   The Antiquities and Art Treasures Act, 1972

In the International scenario, UNESCO has played an active role focusing international attention on the stewardship and preservation of monuments and cultural property. This is now a rapidly evolving area of international law. The major international treaties include the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, the 1970 UNESCO Convention on prohibiting the trade in illicitly-obtained cultural property, and the 1995 Unidroit Convention on the repatriation of Cultural objects.

However, the question remains as whether these laws, regulations, rules and international treatises to conserve the monuments are dead-letter law. Is the Government or the international community putting their best efforts into the enforcement of laws already enacted? But before that, are these laws and statutes, comprehensive enough to provide adequate conservation of monuments? These are the main questions that the author will attempt to address in the course of this paper.

   " The past is not past, it is still passing by…”

HERITAGE CONSERVATION

In order to adequately comprehend what constitutes conservation of monuments, the basic proposition that needs to be addressed, is larger. This concept pertains to “Heritage”. According to the Thesaurus, one of the meanings of word “Heritage” is Legacy. Heritage belongs not only to people or the culture concerned, but also to mankind as a whole and it plays an important role in underpinning people’s cultural identity.       

 According to Section 2(a) of The Ancient Monument And Archaeological Sites And Remains Act, 1958[1], the meaning of expression  “ancient monument” includes any structure, erection or monument, or any tumulus or place of interment, or any cave, rock-sculpture, inscription or monolith, which is of historical, archaeological or artistic interest and which has been in existence for not less than one hundred years. Furthermore, it includes

(i) The remains of an ancient monument, (ii) The site of an ancient monument,

(iii) Such portion of land adjoining the site of an ancient monument as may be required for fencing or covering in or otherwise preserving such monument, and (iv) The means of access to, and convenient inspection of, and ancient monument.

This concept of heritage or legacy, which we have acquired, comprises of the monuments, location, people and their cultural aspect within its growing ambit. From grand national monuments to humble buildings that form the fabric of Indian settlements, the cultural property of the country constitute a priceless resource for local, national and international communities alike. The architectural and artistic legacies bear witness to the complex history of innovation and cross-cultural exchange that dates back to the earliest period of human civilization, and continue to shape local identities to this day. These sites and artefacts are the touchstone of our collective cultural memory, and the foundation upon which communities can build their future.

THE CONSERVATION PRINCIPLE[2]: The word ‘conservation’ is used in several contexts: In its broadest sense, it can be associated either with the ecology movement, the energy crisis or with the fabric of historic cities. It is also open to a wide range of interpretations, from outright preservation, when we refer to the destruction of the fragile rain-forests in the Silent Valley or the threat of pollution to the Taj Mahal, to broader concepts like ‘sustainable development’, which involve the use of non-renewable resources in the natural environment, and the management of historical cities to accommodate new economic activity. It is often presented and is a quite commonly observed and seen practice that, while the economic value of a building attracts developers and decision makers, its cultural value is not recognised many a time. In contrast, conservation is a practice that protects and enhances the cultural value of a building.[3] It places value on the building and not on the land on which it sits. For these reasons conservation is often misunderstood as an antithesis of development. Conservation offers an alternative paradigm for development; and while this idea has been clearly understood and accepted in environmental realms, it is unfortunate to say that it still awaits recognition in fields of architecture and town planning[4].

As the author mentioned in the Introduction, monuments are frozen or mummified; at times, later additions are removed and the structure is restored to its original/ authentic state of existence. This may be necessary in certain cases but it is not comprehensive enough to cover a wide range of built heritage that is present especially in our country. For example, age alone cannot be a criterion for valuing a building. A building may not be hundred years old, but can still be considered important for its commemorative importance or its architectural merit. Second, we cannot declare all heritage buildings as monuments and afford to freeze it either. There are a host of structures whose survival or sustenance will be meaningful and possible only through their rouse. Hence, there is a need to have a different approach and attitude to find a place for a host of other "living" buildings i.e., buildings that are still being inhabited. Conservation of many buildings may involve repair, addition and reconstruction without damaging the value of the fabric. However, much of this reconstruction could be authentic. That is, with the traditional crafts and craftsmen still existing, many of these structures or portions of them can be built as before[5]. This traditional skill too has to be recognised as part of the heritage and linked with conservation efforts. Ignoring this and misconceiving heritage as something genuine and frozen can cause irreparable damage.

NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL LEGAL FRAMEWORKS.

…if you imitate what is left, granting fidelity to be possible... how is the new work better than the old? There was yet in the old some life, some mysterious suggestion of what it had been, and of what it had lost...John Ruskin.

India has a rich cultural heritage in the form of temples, forts, palaces, churches and mosques. The monuments of different types are spread all over the country. These edifices are being protected in order to preserve the artistic and historic value and pass them on to the posterity.

The conservation process varies from simple repair or maintenance to that of a highly complicated nature[6]. It requires greater emphasis on documentation, identification and evaluation of tactics, selection or required techniques, implementation in a systematic way, monitoring, etc. The conservation policy may consists of several aspects, such as the selection and listing of monuments, legislation and financing for restoration and maintenance, historic urbanism, town and country planning and international affairs[7]. In India,

1.The Indian Treasure Trove Act, 1878.

2.The Ancient Monuments Preservation Act, 1904.

3.The Antiquities (Export Control) Act, 1947

4.The Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958

5.The Antiquities and Art Treasures Act, 1972, -forms the framework for further legislation.

The Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act of 1958 came into force with effect from 29^th August 1958. According to the Act, ancient and historical monuments, sculpture carvings and other like objects, archaeological sites and remains are protected and preserved. Archaeological excavations are regulated and are of National importance.
The Antiquities and Art Treasures Act of 1972 came into force with effect from 9^th September 1972. According to the Act export trade in antiquities and art a treasure is regulated and smuggling and fraudulent dealings in antiquities and ancient monuments is prevented.

These legislations owe their legitimacy to the Article 49 Constitution of India[8],

On the similar lines the Constitution of India also provides through Entry 67 of list 1 of seventh schedule which says that Ancient and historical monuments and records, and archaeological sites and remains, [declared by or under law made by parliament] to be of national importance. This entry clearly confers a corresponding legislative power upon the parliament, Entry 12 of list 2[9] and Article. 51A[10].

The Archaeological Survey of India (A.S.I.) is the main actor in the field of conservation of the monuments in India and is primarily  responsible for upholding these above-mentioned laws. At present, the Archaeological Survey of India looks after more than 5,000 monuments ranging in date from prehistoric times to the 19^th century, which also include 16 World Heritage Properties. Some of the main functions of the Archaeological Survey of India are as follows[11]:

Maintenance, Conservation & Preservation of centrally protected monuments and sites.

Conducting archaeological exploration & excavations.

Chemical preservation of monuments and antiquarian remains.

Architectural survey of monuments.

Development of epigraphical researches.

Setting up and re-organization of site museums.

Training in Archaeology and creating awareness of the heritage of the country.

Implementation of the provisions of Antiquity and Art Treasure Act 1972.

In order to obtain some clarity as to the process of conservation, the implementation of legislations and also the developments in this area, the author visited Archaeological Survey of India office (Koramangala, Bangalore). During the interview with one of the senior officials, the author was told that Archaeological Survey of India is doing a remarkable job in order to conserve monuments. For that purpose, the researcher got the information, that the Government order no.1764 dated 16^th June 1992 in compliance with the Section 3 of -The Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958, which says that Certain ancient monuments, etc., deemed to be of national importance, the Archaeological Survey of India has ordered that the constructions and minings near 100 meters around the National Monuments are prohibited and beyond 200 meters regulations for the construction and mining purposes has been done. The Researcher was also told that encroachments around and in the monuments are being dealt with a strict hand and for that purpose. The Unauthorized Occupants Act, 1972 has proved to be of a great help and  the enactment has been used effectively in locations like Nandi Temple (90 houses), Hampi (200) houses and Someshwara Temple (1 house). The official also told the author that the Director General of Archaeological Survey of India was authorized to issue license in regulated areas for the purposes of building and the corresponding example that he gave in this regard was the construction of Jain College in South Cantonment, Karnataka. The researcher was also told that the Archaeological Survey of India has been maintaining the monuments at Hampi since the day these were declared as protected in the year 1921 and that currently, it had prepared a five-year plan for the comprehensive renovation and conservation of the monuments at Hampi.[12]

The Judicial Opinion:  In this scenario when there is a real need to conserve our symbols of cultural heritage like various monuments,  judicial intervention also assumes importance. Important issues that the judiciary has dealt with in this regard are those of sustainable development, intergenerational equity and the precautionary principle.[13]. The landmark cases in this regard are as discussed below:

• A case of great significance with regard to conservation of monuments is Taj Trapezium Zone, also known as the Taj Mahal case.[14] In this case a Public Interest Litigation was filed in which it was alleged that due to the environmental pollution caused mainly through the use of coke or coal by industries which are situated near Taj Mahal {Zone- known as Taj Trapezium Zone (TTZ)}, the quality of the marble of the Taj Mahal was rapidly deteriorating. The Court held that Taj Mahal apart from being a cultural heritage site, was also an industry by itself ,due to the reason that a lot of revenue is being earned through Taj Mahal through tourism alone. Here, Court referred to the principles of sustainable development and also the precautionary principle-thus directing the industries within TTZ to use Natural Gas instead of coke/coal, and if not able to do so, they must relocate themselves.

Ø       Wasim Ahmed Saeed v. Union of India[15] : In this case the Supreme Court issued certain directions to the Archaeological Survey of India to protect the monuments in the state of Rajasthan mainly the monument of Fatehpur Sikri which is famous for Hazrat Saleem Chishti Shrine, Moghul palace and Buland Darwaza.

Ø       Rajeev Mankotia v. Secretary to the President of India[16]: In this case a Public Interest Litigation was filed in order to preserve the Vice Regal lodge situated in Shimla origingally constructed by Earl Of Dufferin in year 1888. It was urged that it should be declared as an ancient and historical monument of national importance so that it can be covered under the ambit of Section 3 of The Ancient Monument and Archaeological Sites And Remains Act, 1958. The Supreme Court upheld this view of the petitioners and instructed Government of India not to convert any part of the estate into a tourist hotel.

Ø       Niyamvedi ’s Case[17]: In this case the Kerala HighCourt (a 1995 decision) observed the rule of intergenerational equity and laid emphasis on the fact that even if  there existed no declaration made by the Central Government or the State Government, in accordance with the relevant laws, with regard to preservation or examination of importance of pre-historic monuments, it should be the duty of every citizen to protect and preserve those ancient monuments for the sake of future generations. Similarly, in the case of   M.C.Mehta v. Archaeological Survey of India [18] , the Supreme Court held that the Tomb of Mirza Ghalib must be conserved and maintained as it is of great importance and the past glory of the structure symbolises a artistic value in itself in..     

The International Scenario: UNESCO, the United Nations Education, Science and Culture Organisation, adopted in 1972 the World Heritage Convention in order to protect unique natural or cultural monuments and sites worldwide today, the World Heritage List comprises 506 sites, which are located in 107 countries[19]. UNESCO has a unique responsibility as the sole United Nations agency with the mandate for promoting the stewardship of the world's cultural resources at all levels. The responsibility for safeguarding the world's cultural properties begins at the highest legal and international governmental levels and descends through practical and technical levels down to grass-roots advocacy and hands-on fieldwork. UNESCO's activities in the safeguarding of cultural properties revolve around three axes: Prevention, Management and Intervention. UNESCO oversees a number of international conventions and treaties that assist countries in safeguarding their cultural heritage[20]. Three key conventions have been formulated and adopted in this field:

·         The Hague Convention: The 1954 Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict is known as the Hague Convention. This convention came out of the experience of two World Wars. It has been adopted together with its Protocol concerning the return of cultural property illegally exported during an armed conflict It recognizes the principle that the cultural heritage of any people is the cultural heritage of all. It declares that the deliberate targeting and destruction of non-military cultural heritage is a war crime. It laid the foundations for UNESCO’s efforts to preserve and protect threatened sites in war zones.[21]

• The 1970 Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property: This was the first UNESCO convention to deal with the problem of illegal export of cultural property and its return to source states. It alerts all states to the importance of their own cultural heritage and its protection from neglect, war, or threats from development. It also obligates signatories to take appropriate steps to return objects that could be shown by inventories to have come illegally from another state’s museums or other institutions. The 1970 convention, though weak and only sporadically invoked, has provided the foundation for all subsequent activity in the field of cultural property law and the ethics of collecting[22].
• The World Heritage Convention: The 1972 Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, is known as the World Heritage Convention. This Convention set up the UNESCO’s World Heritage List. Individual states nominate sites of worldwide cultural significance in their own territories to be added to the List for consideration by the Committee at annual meetings. Sites protected tend to be famous monuments, archaeological sites of disappeared indigenous populations, and unique natural preserves or habitats. The Committee tries to publicize the sites, watch them carefully, and alert the world to any that may be threatened by war, neglect, or development.[23]

UNIDROIT Convention on Stolen or Illegally Exported Cultural Objects (1995): UNESCO commissioned the International Commission Institute for the Unification of Private Law (UNIDROIT) to help prepare stronger rules and means than were envisioned in the 1970 Convention. It covers cases of theft, dispossession, ownership, and repatriation across national borders involving private citizens in an attempt to get to the heart of the smuggling problem. It requires the return of cultural property to the Source State.[24]

The Hague Convention and the 1970 Convention address the growing illicit trade in cultural artefacts. These conventions says that:

a) Natural and the cultural heritage are being increasingly threatened by traditional causes of decay as well as by the changing social conditions that have aggravated the problem.

b) The states must assist each other in the task of conservation and preservation as well, but with the permission of the state so concerned.

c) The heritage sites are of boundless interest and knowledge and all the efforts must go into the protection of such an irreplaceable property.

d) Destruction of heritage is nothing but leading towards impoverishment, a condition that effects all the nations, and

e) UNESCO can assist the states in conserving the monuments and heritage sites, if the states think that there is some kind of limitation pertaining to that matter.

In course of drafting the 1954 Hague Convention and the 1970 convention it was observed that the international community was increasingly acknowledging the practice of removing objects of significant importance to a culture's history and identity from their place of origin as unethical. Moreover, In 1978, the UNESCO Intergovernmental Committee for Promoting the Return of Cultural Property to its Countries of Origin or its Restitution in case of Illicit Appropriation was set up. Its role is to act as an international forum for negotiation, discussion and awareness raising in cases where the legal framework, provided by the 1970 Convention, does not apply.

The UNESCO also assists national authorities in developing multidisciplinary plans of action, and implementing projects through the following measures[25]:

Identification, inventory, documentation, technical analysis and conservation.

Site management, Protection from trauma: both natural and man-made

Risk preparedness, and Rehabilitation.

It appears that from above that what the UNESCO seeks is to change the attitudes of national and international communities towards the cultural heritage issue, making it a matter of concern to the general public, to strengthen nationallegislation and institutional capacity, to promote the involvement of all stakeholders, particularly local communities who can bring traditional knowledge to bear on the problems at hand.

SECTION III

           THE PRACTICE

“…It is again no question of expediency or feeling whether we shall preserve the buildings of past time or not. We have no right whatever to touch them. They are not ours. They belong partly to those who built them, partly to all the generations of mankind who follow us….” John Ruskin.

Given the reality of a developing nation like India where concerns of poverty, primary education and basic social standards for its citizens far outweigh issues related to historic buildings, it is no wonder that heritage preservation features very low on the government’s agenda. No doubt the legislations and the various laws, whether national or international, provides for an approach which seems to be some what responsible in its letter and form but, it doesn’t happen in practice i.e. if it happens also in practice, it is unfortunately very less or is a quite “engineered” or “manipulated” process which has no meaning at all and serves the purpose of vested interests only. Over the last decade, as the country’s economic policy has changed from being a rather insular socialistic economy, to one with growing liberalization and government disinvestment, it is no longer feasible to continue looking towards the government alone for heritage preservation[26]. Given a measure of independence and freedom from government control the role of the non-government voluntary agencies is what seems to be the need of the hour. This practice, however must be backed by an institutional structure. These agencies can also work in tandem with the government institutions in order to act where it is required[27]. Similar participation programmes has proved to be a great success in the various developed and developing nations like Thailand, Netherlands, United States of America and England etc. In India, there exist certain agencies, which are coming up and working with governmental agencies (like-Archaeological Survey of India) towards the noble cause of conserving the monuments. The agencies like Indian National Trust for Art and Cultural Heritage (INTACH) are, however, the growing body of knowledge to be gleaned from both indigenous experience and international networking on the guidelines for conservation of our architectural and urban heritage. Also, the works of the National Research Laboratory for Conservation of Cultural Property (NRLCCP) at Lucknow, which has started addressing themselves to the problems of conservation is important in this regard,.

A comparison of the legal framework of conservation models in India and the United States, as the author has done below, would help at this stage to clarify the situation regards both conservation policy and actual practice.[28].

–

This comparative table clearly shows that innovative economic programs in preservation invented by the United States of America -such as tax credit programs for rehabilitation projects, Business Improvement District models and matching grants are tools that can help India to widen its economic base for historic preservation.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 The above chart also highlights that in India, the shortcomings in the conservation of monuments is in reality, due to the lack of systems for the management, training and infrastructure. Another major problem that must be addressed is the lack of legislation as regards monuments which are not under the Archaeological Survey of India... Inadequate management coupled with rapid urbanisation, and the new development agenda makes heritage conservation excruciatingly difficult[29]. Other threats to conservation include misinterpretation, encroachment and misuse of property.

In this scenario, the need of the hour is to conserve those aspects that contribute in making the historical places significant like promoting the heritage sites giving special tourist interest and value. These elements are all interrelated and have to be understood and interpreted holistically as they are a response to varying factors like topography, available resource and the local climate[30].

Below, the author pays special attention to the issue of Taj Mahal’s conservation and the UNESCO’s contribution to that, as an example of monument conservation.

The masterpiece of Indian architecture, the Taj Mahal has been included in the list of 'World Heritage' monuments since 1983. It has been seriously damaged by the extreme climatic conditions and monsoon rains, which have led to water infiltration and erosion of the white marble exterior. The constant humidity has, for example, led to the oxydation of the iron dowels and clamps holding together the marble cladding, which is now badly cracked and chipped. Pollution from heavy traffic and the close proximity of factories has moreover discoloured the marble facade, which required constant cleaning[31]. After an initial period in 1997 to evaluate the condition of the monuments, experts from Rhone-Poulenc[32], UNESCO and the Archaeological Survey of India designed a two-stage preservation programme. The first stage of the project is based on the application of products and technologies specifically developed by Rhone-Poulenc's research department to restore the materials used in the construction of these historic monuments and halt their deterioration. The second phase of the programme was based on the transfer of Rhone-Poulenc's technological expertise in stone renovation to team of researchers who will be based at a newly created conservation laboratory (located in the Agra Fort), which will be funded and equipped by the Rhone-Poulenc Foundation. The locally recruited scientists were trained in the use of specific water repellent products and methods, which will enable the continuation of treatment applied to the red sandstone and lime plaster of the Agra Fort.[33]

In this case we can see that how a company which is not Government undertaking has contributed with UNESCO and Archaeological Survey of India in order to conserve the symbol of our cultural heritage namely Taj Mahal. It would have difficult for the Government of India alone to save this Monument without external help, implying the importance of non-Governmental organisations, both corporate and otherwise in this process.

The Taj Mahal is an interesting example, but is it an exception in the count of Monument conservation in India? The author would answer the question in the affirmative, and is of the opinion that often there exists a glaring contradiction between the obligations of agencies like Archaeological Survey of India, what they claim to do, and what the ground level situation is. The following would illustrate the same: Ajanta: Craftsman’s skills and traditions, which are so important for the maintenance of cultural monuments, have mostly been preserved, however, in the field of conservation there are considerable deficits. This deficit can be seen, for instance, in the case of the wall paintings in the Buddhist cave monasteries of Ajanta, which have been in World Heritage List since 1983. The state of the wall paintings is continuously getting worse, which can be attributed to humidity as well as to a lack of care taken by the Archaeological Survey of India.

Jodhpur Historic Town Centre: Jodhpur, the so-called "blue city" in Rajastan, has an important and partly very dense historic monumental fabric, which is highly endangered by overpopulation, a lack of infrastructure, namely a waste-water-system and waste disposal. Here, expert planning for a redevelopment measure to preserve the historical substance would be advisable, however for which until now funding and experts are lacking.

Old Goa[34]: Goa became the seat of a bishop and as a consequence, different orders such as the Franciscans, Jesuits, and Theatins settled in Goa and churches full of grandeur were built. Some of these churches have survived till today like the Jesuit Church of Bom Jesus (1594-1605) or the Franciscan church of St Francis (1661) and the Theatins church of St Cajetan (1656-61), while the oldest standing is that of St Rosary (1543). Because of their importance, they have been put on the World Heritage List. Unfortunately the conservation of these very important monuments has not been carried out satisfactorily. They are still endangered, especially during the monsoon season. The heavy rains penetrate the roofs and destroy much of the interior, in addition, rising damp endangers the walls. Not only the buildings themselves are highly at risk but also the paintings and woodcarvings inside the buildings. This shows that Archaeological Survey of India has been giving no significance even to the monuments, which are on the world heritage list and are thus still suffering.

Hampi: Many claims were made by the Archaeological Survey of India officials when asked about Hampi, which happens to be very important cultural heritage site (as discussed in the previous chapter). BUT, the reality remains that, the World Heritage Committee of UNESCO declared the Group of Monuments at Hampi a World Heritage site in 1986 (28.11.1986). The Archaeological Survey of India has been “maintaining” these monuments since the day these were declared as protected in the year 1921. The World Heritage Committee, at its 23^rd session (29 November – 4 December 1999) held in Morocco, examined the report of the Group of Monuments at Hampi submitted by the UNESCO mission undertaken that October, and observed that two large-scale two-way bridges for vehicular traffic and the second footbridge within the protected areas, dominate the extraordinary natural environment and rural setting. Foreseeing the potential dangers, the Committee declared the site of the Group of Monuments at Hampi as World Heritage in Danger. The Committee was later informed that the construction of two bridges has been halted, and that corrective measures had been undertaken to remove the threats facing the site. The matter was taken up by the Federal Union Minister for Culture with the Chief Minister of Karnataka State with a request to seriously consider whether the bridges should be relocated or dismantled altogether. It was also advised that at any rate no further unplanned development should be allowed in the Hampi area and a taskforce be constituted to devise long-term measures to save the site. The Chief Minister of Karnataka, at the request of the central government, constituted such a taskforce to suggest corrective measures.

                A UNESCO expert team visited Hampi in the fourth week of February 2000 and observed that the construction of bridges has not been stopped and is going on in full swing. The UNESCO expert group met State authorities and apprised them of the imminent danger to the site. The taskforce constituted by the Government of Karnataka held two meetings and submitted a report to the Chief Minister of Karnataka for the relocation of the two bridges. Since then, the construction has stopped on the two bridges. Further, a large number of unauthorised encroachments onto the site have been removed in Hampi by Archaeological Survey of India. Here in this case we can see that if Archaeological Survey of India has been maintaining Hampi’s rich monuments since 1921 ,then why in the first place the construction work of  two large-scale two-way bridges for vehicular traffic and the second footbridge within the protected areas got started. This clearly indicates that not enough care was given in order to maintain the rich Monument and only this type of incident  , the Archaeological Survey of India decided to prepare a five year programme for the comprehensive conservation of the monuments at Hampi .[35]

                 CONCLUSION

“While modernisation is current demand, traditional culture that bases its entity on the past is not dead and gone, It is still Practiced and living,, it is a continuous process, open to adjustment and thus if development is to be achieved it should be the development based on the conservation model”.

In India the legal scenario, which is being witnessed by us, is a scenario resulting from the budgetary constraints of the central government and its agency that protects and maintains historic structures. This however excludes hundreds of thousands of other architectural sites and monuments from government protection, leaving them acutely vulnerable and unprotected, and it is clear that the legislations in this regard are inadequate or improperly framed. At the same time the cities in our country grapple with issues of an exploding urban population, limited infrastructural and budgetary resources and increasing inner city decay.This results in a greater vulnerability of its architectural and cultural heritage which is gradually becoming prey to malices like successive encroachments and bad, irregular and unplanned town planning policies. In this given scenario economic incentives and tax credits as seen in the case of United States of America especially pertaining to guidance and facilitation of conservation, along with the phenomenon of public-private partnerships, could perhaps be adopted. Moreover, coordination and cooperation among the government agencies and private sectors engaged in cultural activities, especially the Non Governmental Agencies like Indian National Trust for Art & Cultural Heritage (INTACH) and the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) must be promoted.

The broad partnership between public and private entities, professionals and local community craftspeople has proven to be a critical element in ensuring the long-term success and viability of preserving cultural properties as seen in the case of developed nations like U.S.A. Also, UNESCO particularly encourages private sector groups to contribute to the effort, with the recognition that successful conservation efforts help spur additional projects within the same community, advocating the culture of preservation and conservation through the use of appropriate conservation techniques and approaches. Therefore under such scenario, the governmental as well as non governmental agencies must cooperate and government should encourage their efforts so that they can work for high standards in conservation and management of monuments. Educational programmes that fosters international exchanges for cultural heritage professionals, and promotes a better understanding at the national as well as International levels to conserve the monuments must be organised[36].

After all, we know that conservation is an attitude that has been negated by modern city planning, and as a result the conservation in India is at the crossroads. In India, there is an opportunity, indeed a necessity, for making planning conservation oriented. The existing town and country planning acts do have provisions for conferring special status to buildings and heritage areas. However, for many reasons (including political and social factors) this has never been enforced. In order to focus attention and action on heritage buildings, recent initiatives such as that of INTACH and various other environmental organisations that have pushed for a separate Heritage Act/ Regulations, would be helpful. However, this requires help from administrative and legislative quarters, as well as adequate support from the judiciary. Above all, It can provide the impetus and ideology for a conservation-oriented development policy, which seems to be the need of the hour.