With no compound wall or fencing, residents of slums surrounding the heritage site use the courtyard as a thoroughfare, a garbage dump, a park and an open toilet. Moss covers the walls and all the figures engraved on them have been defaced or damaged. No wonder then that the Bombay

High Court had to step in to ensure that the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) and the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) took measures to protect the national monument.

“Apart from ASI’s board, there’s nothing that suggests it’s a heritage site,” said local resident Himal Sanghvi.

The cave temple dedicated to Lord Shiva is divided into three core chambers—a four-foot-tall Natraj is carved on one of the walls but has been damaged.

Built around the same time as the Jogeshwari caves—between 520 AD and 550 AD—the monument got its name (Mandapeshwar) as it houses the largest mandap and a prominent Garbagriha (sanctum sanctorum).

Mandapeshwar, like other temple caves, uses the ancient system of rainwater harvesting. The four tanks at the entrance of the cave are brimming to capacity, though only one of them has clean water which is used by slum-dwellers for their daily chores. The other three tanks have been turned into sewage tanks.

Portuguese invaded the region and converted the caves into a church—the left arm of the temple has a prominent cross engraved on it, just opposite the wall with Goddess Saraswati carved on it.

‘Our Lady of Immaculate Conception Church’, a burial ground and other parish offices are located on the top of the monument—the church was locked in a legal battle with the ASI claiming ownership over the land.

While BMC and ASI officials claim that they couldn’t take any action since the caves were “under dispute”, church officials were not available for comments despite repeated attempts.

ASI’s Superintending Archaeologist, Mumbai circle, G S Narsimhan said since the church had some land in its name, the High Court had ordered that the land be demarkated. “The Church property and cave land will have to be demarcated. The order was passed some seven years back we got its copy just recently,” he said.

“Fencing the area is a priority and we will do it after demarcating the church property,” said Narsimhan.

Caretaker said the ASI’s efforts to construct a protection wall were stalled by a stay order from the court brought by the church. Assistant Municipal Commissioner (R North ward) N V Pai echoed this concern: “The BMC could not do much in this matter as it was under dispute.’’

But while ASI and civic officials claim that the dispute with the church prevented them from improving the situation at the caves, nothing was done to check encroachments around the monument.

According to the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act 1958 (24 of 1958)—as stated by the ASI board—no structure should come up within 200 metres of the protected site. But at Mandapeshwar, caves are surrounded by numerous shanties.

“If constructions are not allowed, then why did the BMC give us the permission? My shop is here since 1976 and is authorised,” said Sitaram Kewat, who has a furniture shop bang opposite the caves on the other side of the road, less than 100 metres from the site. And his shop is not the only one—several other establishments, bars and restaurants, garages and shanties have come up within in 100 metres of the caves.

“We have not marked the 100-metre periphery. We will do it now after receiving the HC order,” Pai said.