|
A PIL was
filed in the High Court, Hyderabad under Writ petition no
20387 of 2001 by Dr. V.K Bawa, Mrs. Rani Sarma, Shri D.
Dangoria, And Mr. Jafar Nizam against the Government of A.P.
represented by the Principal Secretary, Municipal
Administration (MA & UD), HUDA represented by its Vice Chair
person , MCH represented by its Commissioner, and the
Secretary, Department of Youth Advancement, Tourism and
Cultural Development, Government of AP
(2) The petitioners stated
that the road widening and the resultant demolition activity
undertaken by the MCH in the Charminar Precint, was so
undertaken without the prior approval of the Vice Chair
person, HUDA, who was to act on the advice of the Heritage
Conservation Committee , in terms of Regulation 13 of HUDA
Zoning Regulations 1981. Accordingly they prayed to the
Honourable Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other
appropriate direction declaring the action of the respondents
in not preserving the structures in the Heritage precincts of
the city as violative of the declared policy of the Government
to get the status of Heritage City as per UNESCO norms and
G.O. 542 dated 14.12.95 and the notification of R-2 No
3023/PR/HUDA2000 dated 30.4.2000 and consequently direct the
respondents (i) to take steps to preserve all the buildings in
Heritage Precincts area(ii) to conduct comprehensive studies
on the foundation of Charminar and the Tunnels leading to
Golconda Fort for taking steps to get the World Heritage City
statusfrom UNESCO and pass such or further orders as deemed
fit.
(3) In its judgment, the
Court observed that the Preservation Heritage Buildings and
Heritage Precincts has been the subject matter of a policy
decision by the state. The Court, in this connexion, referred
to and quoted extensively from, G.O.Ms.No 542 dated 14.12
1995, authorizing HUDA to add a new regulation to te HUDA
Zoning Regulations, 1981; Regulation 13 (1) and (2) of HUDA
Zoning Regulations Act 1981, in terms of which no development
or re-development or engineering operation or additions,
alterations, repairs, renovation including the painting of
buildings, replacement of special features or demolition of
the whole or any part thereof or plastering of said heritage
Buildings or Heritage Precincts shall be allowed except with
the prior written permission of the Vice-Chairman, HUDA; that
the Vice-Chairman, HUDA shall act on the advice of the
Heritage Conservation Committee to be appointed by the
Government and he can overrule the recommendations of the
Heritage Conservation Committee in exceptional cases for
reasons to be recorded in writing and this power cannot be
delegated by him. The Court further drew attention to
Regulation 13(7) of HUDA Zoning Regulations Act 1981 which
said that the buildings in Heritage Precincts shall maintain
the skyline in the precinct so as not to diminish or destroy
the value and beauty of the Precinct. Development proposals,
street furniture, road widening proposals and outdoor
publicity within the Heritage Precincts shall need to be
approved by the Vice Chairman HUDA and the Heritage
Conservation Committee before permission is granted by the MCH
or other competent authorities. Charminar area was declared as
Heritage Precinct No 10 under HUDA notification no 3023/PR/HUDA/2000
dated 30.04.2000.
(4) The Respondents
submitted that the road widening project was finalized in the
year 1998, prior to the addition of Regulation 13 to HUDA
Zoning Regulations Act 1981 and that such a scheme was taken
up in terms of the Zonal Development Plan, which has a
statutory force; that during road widening, only one compound
wall was demolished taking into consideration the safety
requirement. The Respondents further drew the attention of
the Court to the minutes of the meeting of the Heritage
Conservation Committee held on 5.10.2001 in which the latter
gave permission for the road development plans submitted to
them by MCH, subject to the conditions of imposing
architectural control on the new facades as detailed in the
note. This resolution of the Heritage Conservation Committee
was approved by the HUDA Vice Chair person on 8.10.2002.
|
|
There
cannot be any doubt whatsoever that having regard to the
policy decision taken by the State and keeping in view
Regulation no 13 of HUDA Zoning Regulations Act 1981, the
requirements there under must be complied with before taking
up the Zonal Development Plans in Heritage Precinct no 10.
Requirement to take recourse to Regulation 13(2) arose after
30.04.2000 when Charminar area was declared as Heritage
Precinct no 10. If the respondents had been proceeding on a
misconception that they need not take any further concurrence
from the Vice Chairman HUDA, having regard to the fact that
the zonal development plan was approved as far back as in the
year 1998, the same, in our opinion, although may not be
technically correct, but keeping in view the fact that now
even the Vice Chairman HUDA has accorded permission, no
further direction in this regard is necessary.
The State,
there cannot be any doubt whatsoever, is bound to preserve the
Heritage Buildings and Heritage Precincts and it, before
making any modifications/alterations therein, must carry out
its activities strictly in terms of the mandatory provisions
of Regulation 13 of the 1981 Regulations.
The
respondents therefore, having regard to the fact that
statutory provisions have now been complied with, may carry on
the project in terms of the directions of the Vice Chairman,
HUDA.
In regard
to a request by the petitioners’ lawyer that that the
petitioners be given an opportunity of hearing, the Court
observed that considering the status of the first petitioner
(Dr. Bawa), if he has any suggestions to make, he may do so in
writing, which, we (the Court) are sure , shall receive the
due consideration of the authorities concerned. |
