PESHAWAR: The Peshawar High Court on Tuesday expressed concern about a lack of coordination between the mining and archaeology departments and blamed it for the award of mining leases in areas close to archaeological sites to threaten national heritage.

A bench consisting of Chief Justice Qaiser Rashid Khan and Justice Mohammad Ibrahim Khan observed that complications had arisen as there was no coordination between heads of the mining and archaeology directorates.

The bench adjourned hearing into the petitions declaring it will issue a detailed order to highlight steps to be taken by the government, including the formation of an advisory committee under the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Antiquities Act, 2016, to determine the issue of compensation to be paid to the petitioners if any.

The chief justice had taken notice of the issue of continuous mining activities nearby archaeological sites in Mardan, Buner and Swat districts sometimes ago and had also summoned several of the relevant officers.

Court to issue guidelines to govt to protect archaeological places

Few months ago the high court had ordered stoppage of all mining activities near archaeological sites and ordered director (archaeology) Dr Abdul Samad to act as focal person on this issue before the court.

Following cancellation of leases after the order of the high court, several of the aggrieved persons including those running stone crushing units have moved the high court and have filed petitions claiming that the mining spots were not within one km radius of the archaeological sites.

Barrister Asadul Mulk appeared for the mining department, whereas several lawyers including Syed Amjid Ali Shah, Babar Khan Yousafzai, Barrister Waqar Ali, Muhammad Asif Khan, Asfandyar Yousafzai, Khalid Khan Afridi, Syed Mohammad Ilyas, Khan Ghawas, etc. represented the petitioners.

Dr Abdul Samad, Mardan deputy commissioner Habib Arif and additional advocate general Syed Sikandar Hayat Shah also appeared before the bench.

The petitioners’ lawyers argued that their clients were valid leaseholders with mining leases granted to them by the Mineral Titles Committee.

They said under the pretence of the high court’s orders, they were being prevented from carrying out mining activities and criminal cases and FIRs had also been registered against them.

Advocate Amjad Ali argued that if the leased areas had been found to be protected areas and heritage sites subsequent to the grant of lease, then compensation should be awarded to the petitioners for having invested a huge amount of money in the sites.

He said the leases being awarded and then cancelled due to no fault on their part.

The lawyer said his client was awarded mining lease of an area spread over 200 acres after fulfilling all legal requirements near the archaeological site of Rani Gatt in Buner.

He, however, said antiques were recovered from different places, so the lease was cancelled but without paying any compensation to his client.

“It was the inefficiency of the mineral and archaeology departments that the lease was awarded near an archaeological site. If the advisory committee concernedhad been constituted under the Antiquities Act, the problem would not have arisen,” he said.

Dr Samad, AAG and Mardan DC defended the cancellation of the leases as the leased areas overlapped with historical and archaeological sites.

The chief justice then summoned director-general of the mines and mineral directorate Mohammad Naeem, who later explained that the cancellation of leases had been carried out in accordance with the high court’s orders.

Barrister Asadul Mulk said the mines department alone could not beheld responsible for the present situation.

He said firstly, the provincial legislature had committed oversight in failing to include a representative of the archaeology department in the Mineral Title Committee, which could have identified and prevented the grant of leases over historical sites.

The lawyer also said the declaration of antiquities published in the official gazette lacked coordinates of the historical sites.

He said the government had also failed to constitute the Advisory Committee under Section 3 read with Section 70 of the Antiquities Act, 2016, which would determine issues of compensation to be paid to the petitioners in the case.

The bench observed that the mining department had unnecessarily awarded leases without considering its effect on heritage places.

It added that it was striving to save the centuries old places of historical importance.

Published in Dawn, June 1st, 2022