The Meghalaya High Court has allowed authorities of the St. Anthony’s Lower Primary School to rebuild the school but said the plan and architecture of the building should be more or similar to the demolished one.
A division bench of Chief Justice Indra Prasanna Mukerji and Justice Wanlura Diengdoh also directed the management to proceed with the reconstruction work, but said it “shall not create any third party rights by transfer, creating encumbrance or parting with possession of the property without the leave of the Court.”
“If the approved plan has to be revised, it may be so done and duly approved by the Meghalaya Urban Development Authority,” the court said.
The division bench also heard the five contemnors of the Don Bosco Technical School management who told the court that the 72-year old school building, which was built between 1949 and 1952, was found to be structurally very weak in 2024 and hence needed large scale restructuring, rebuilding and renovation.
The contemnors told the court that at the close of 2024 the building was found to be tilting and “urgent and immediate action is called for to prevent any serious damages or accidents”. This was also recorded in the recommendation of the management of the school on January 4, 2025.
While the Meghalaya Development Authority approved the plan for restructuring, rebuilding it did not raise any question with regard to heritage, the contemnors said.
The court however raised questions why the authorities had to demolish the school when the court was in vacation.
Referring to the order passed on December 9, 2024 that the Meghalaya Heritage Authority was directed to inspect and make preliminary inquiry into the school the court said, “The school management had full knowledge of it. The Court despite being closed for the Christmas vacation had a vacation bench sitting periodically. Why this allegedly imminent danger to the building and the need to demolish it was not brought to the notice of the vacation bench and appropriate leave obtained to demolish the building? When the matter was made returnable on the very next day of reopening of the Court on 28th January, 2025, why during the vacation of the Court, the building had to be demolished, when it was allowed to stand for all this while?”
The court directed the contemnors to file an affidavit and answer to the questions it has raised by March 17 before the next hearing in March 19, 2025.
