The apex court then pulled up the state of Uttar Pradesh for not coming up with a comprehensive policy or a vision to protect and preserve the beauty of Taj Mahal
The Supreme Court on Monday refused to lift a stay on the construction of a multi-level parking lot in the vicinity of the Taj Mahal suggesting that there was no harm in tourists walking right up to the monument.
Overriding pleas made by Additional Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who insisted that the multi-level parking was essential to the development of the monument, the bench reminded the state that there was only one Taj Mahal - an internationally important monument, and there was a need for "sustainable development."
"Why don't you construct the parking lot beyond 1.5 km? Tourists can walk up to the monuments," the bench comprising Justices Madan Lokur and Deepak Gupta said. Mehta then insisted that without a parking lot, there would be a huge congestion and traffic which would then inconvenience the international tourists. To this Justice Lokur quipped: "Don't worry about foreign tourists, they love to walk."
The apex court then pulled up the state of Uttar Pradesh for not coming up with a comprehensive policy or a vision to protect and preserve the beauty of Taj Mahal. The court then issued notice to the Taj Trapezium Zone (TTZ) authority and directed them to submit a comprehensive plan with a vision to protect the historic monument.
Reviewing the state's progress in planting the more than one lakh trees it was supposed to under the compensatory afforestation scheme, the bench said felling 11 trees - to construct the parking lot, and replanting 110 sapling in return, was a small move in the larger scheme of things.
"What happened to the more than one lakh trees you were supposed to plant? According you your report, more than 70 per cent of the trees planted have died, and secondly, there is no space to plant the number of requisite trees," Justice Lokur said reading from the forest department's report.
Mehta then tried to point out that to promote tourism around the Taj, the state government had planned an orientation centre near the premises that would provide facilities to tourists costing around Rs 231 crore.
"If you are saying this is your vision document, then you are in for a serious problem. We want a vision document which you don't have and that's the whole problem," the bench said in response.
The top court was hearing a petition filed by UP's tourism department seeking permission to cut down 15 trees for the construction of the parking lot. However, in a turn of events environmentalist MC Mehta, who has filed a petition seeking protection for the famed structure, submitted that the state government had failed to take prior approval from Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) and Supreme Court before construction was initiated.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
 "Taj Mahal")
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}