Can the state destroy a monument of historical or architectural importance under its protection? The Chief Minister of Maharashtra, Devendra Fadnavis said that he agreed with Hindu groups who want the tomb of emperor Aurangzeb at Khuldabad near Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar to be razed to the ground. He, however, qualified his statement by saying that the structure was under the central government's protection.

Archeologists said the government would break its law if it destroyed a monument listed as a protected structure. "It is not possible that a monument protected by the government can be destroyed by the same state that is responsible for its protection and preservation," said an archeologist with the state archeology department. "The government is mandated by the country's Constitution to protect national monuments."

The gate to the Zain-ud-din dargah and the gate and tomb of Aurangzeb.

Aurangzeb died in CE 1707. His grave and those of relatives are located inside a large funerary complex that began as a dargah of a medieval saint, Zain-ud-din who was Aurangzeb's spiritual teacher. Unlike the grand tombs of the other five 'Great Mughals', Aurangzeb's grave, located in the corner of Zain-ud-din's tomb, is an open-air memorial with marble walls, covered with earth and cloth. Many features, like the gate and walls, were added long after his death.

The Khuldabad tomb is included in the list of monuments in the Ellora subcircle of the Archeological Survey of India. The ASI protects and preserves over 3600 monuments across the country. The Ancient Monuments and Archeological Sites and Remains Act 1958, lays down a long-drawn procedure that includes a gazette notification, a public hearing, and a report to a parliamentary committee if a monument is to be delisted. The last such proposal to de-list monuments happened in March 2024 when the ASI told the Ministry of Culture, to which it reports, that it wanted to de-list 18 structures because they were either 'untraceable', destroyed, or were no longer of national importance. Most were relatively insignificant sites like kos minars (milestones) and cemeteries.

The gate to the Zain-ud-din dargah and the gate and tomb of Aurangzeb

"If the procedure under the law is not followed anybody can approach the court and challenge the destruction of a listed monument," said an archeologist.

Archeologists said it will be difficult for the government to prove that a monument is not of national importance if the structure is from an important period in history. "The demand to destroy Aurangzeb's tomb is a result of changing political ideology. It will be difficult to prove that the tomb (Aurangzeb's) does not exist or that it is not of historical significance," said the archeologist.

Suraj Pandit, Professor and Head of the Department of Ancient Indian Culture and Department of Buddhist Studies, Sathaye College, the Chief Minister was well aware of the law about national monuments. "What he meant was though people think it should be done (demolished), it cannot be done because it is the central government's protection. There are similar structures around the tomb," Pandit said. "We know it is a political statement. It is far-fetched to think the monument will be delisted and demolished."