|
Writ Petition No 22263 of 2004 in the Court of the Hon’ble
Chief Justice, Mr. Devinder Gupta and the Hon,ble Mr. Justice
M.Narayana Reddy for revoking the order for demolition of “G”
block in the Secretariat premises
Between
Forum
For a Better Hyderabad, represented by its Member of Heritage
Cell, Manatosh Mandal, Petitioner,
And
1.
Government of A.P. represented by its Principal Secretary,
Municipal Administration and
Urban
Development of A.P.,
2.
HUDA, represented by its Vice Chairman,
3.
Municipal Corporation of
Hyderabad,
Government of A.P., represented by
its
Chief Secretary (R4 was impleaded as per court order dated
2.12.04)
Petition under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India praying that the High Court may declare
the action of the Respondents to demolish ‘G’ Block,
Secretariat complex,
Hyderabad as unconstitutional and violation of Article 49 of
the Constitution of India and consequently direct the
authorities to preserve the building as was done in the case
of the Nampally Sarai.
Upon a report in the the Hindu with a
photograph that the ‘G’ Block building in the Secretariat,
Hyderabad, is being pulled down, the Heritage Cell of the
Forum For A Better Hyderabad at once sent a letter of request
on 1.12.04 to the Chief Secretary, requesting him to revoke
the order for demolition. As the building was already being
pulled down and the process of demolition was not stopped,
the Forum represented by Manatosh Mandal, filed the above
Writ Petition.
The Court in its interim order on 2.12.04 directed the
Respondents to respond to the prayer of the petitioners and
meanwhile that in case there has been no consideration on the
petitioner’s representation to preserve the building in
question being a building of historical significance,
appropriate decision of appropriate level be taken before
initiating any action for demolition of the said building and
to withhold demolition till such action is taken.
The petitioner, thereafter, sent a further letter to the Chief
Secretary on 3.12.04, with a detailed note on the historical
importance and architectural and cultural values of the
building and stating the reasons as to why it should be
preserved. The letter explained how each of the criteria for
identification of Heritage Buildings, as prescribed in HUDA,
Conservation of Historical Buildings and Areas in Hyderabad
City, with Appendices, is satisfied by the building. The
letter further stated that many conservationists and experts
and concerned citizens, including several senior ex-
bureaucrats, members of Intach, Hyderabad chapter, etc., had,
in the past, repeatedly represented to the state government
for the conservation of the building for its heritage value.
The Forum’s letter referred to the need to refer to an
independent body of heritage conservationists to determine the
maintainability of the building and its restorability, how in
the past several decisions of government bodies for demolition
of allegedly non-maintenable buildings were, on
re-examination, found restorable and were restored. On the
plea taken by the Government that the building was not a
listed heritage building, the letter submitted that
identification of heritage buildings and heritage precincts
was not a one time exercise, but an on-going process and that
there have been periodically additions to and deletions
from, the list. There were many buildings in Hyderabad and
Secunderabad, which have immense heritage value but not yet
been listed as heritage buildings. A few examples cited were
the Old jail near Manda market: Methodist Church school, SJ
Road; St Georges Grammar School building, Hyderabad built in
1836; the AP Legislative Assembly; Mehboob College complex,
Patny, Secunderabad, Presbitery of the St Mary’s Cathedral at
SD Road, Secunderabad (St Annes School), and many other
cathedrals. In the end the Forum again requested the Chief
Secretary to revoke the order for demolition and instead,
ask the concerned authorities to arrange for its conservation.
A 1915 map of Hyderabad , showing the Building was also
enclosed.
A very brief reply dated 22.12.04 was received to our letter
from the Government, which did not show proper consideration
of the points made in our note enclosed with the letter of the
6th December, 04..
In its final judgment dated 31.12.04, the Court observed as
follows:
The Respondent, GAD, A.P., submitted that
the ‘G’ Block was constructed in 1928 only, that the R & B
Department reported the D,E,G,and H blocks as unfit for use
and recommended evacuation therefrom. He added that ‘G’ Block
was not a listed heritage building. The petitioner countered
by saying that the ‘G’ Block building was constructed in 1888
in support of which he produced material and a map of the year
1915,which included the building . It was further submitted
that the notification of heritage buildings and heritage
precincts which was issued in the year 1998 was not final, and
identifying heritage buildings and heritage precincts was a
continuous process and the Heritage Conservation Committee was
created by the state government and one of its terms of
reference was to prepare supplementary list of buildings,
precincts, areas, artifacts, structures of historical,
aesthetical, architectural or cultural value to which
Regulation No 13 of HUDA Zoning Regulations 1981 would apply.
Admittedly the building is not included in the list as per the
Regulation. Whether or not the building has any historical,
aesthetical, architectural or cultural value and would be
required to be added to the heritage buildings or its
precincts, necessarily will have to be looked into by the
Heritage Conservation Committee, which was meeting on a very
near date. On the basis of their recommendation, notification
might be amended by addition or deletion. The question
whether the building will have to be demolished will be
dependent upon the report of the Heritage Conservation
Committee.
Accordingly, the Court disposed of the
writ petition with direction that the entire material placed
on record in this case be made available to the Heritage
Conservation Committee. In case the Committee expresses
opinion to include it in the heritage buildings, it will be
for the Government to take steps to amend the notification of
heritage buildings and heritage precincts. The Committee will
take a decision within a period of one month from the date of
receipt of the order. Till the decision of the Committee is
rendered, status quo will be maintained.
The
Heritage Conservation Committee has since recommended the
listing of the ‘G’ Block building in the list of heritage
buildings and heritage precincts. |
