Skip to main content

Something big, in the 'ethos and culture' of fascism: Is that the Central Vista model?


By Tikender Singh Panwar*

The protest at Capitol building in Washington DC on January 6 was unequivocally condemned worldwide. Apart from the general feeling which many of us had to this protest/attack, I was also intrigued to know: “How old is the building?” The same building which was targeted by the Trump supporters. This Capitol building was made operational in 1800 after seven years of construction work and continues to stand tall and serve its purpose. So, it is almost 220 years old.
Our government at New Delhi filed an affidavit in the Supreme Court of India in as many as 10 writ petitions filed by different groups of people challenging the construction project of the Central Vista. The affidavit strongly supported the proposal that the construction of new parliament building along with the changes proposed in the Central Vista is of utmost importance.
Before we go into the details of the affidavit and the decision delivered by the Supreme Court of India on January 6, it is prudent to exhibit that one of the contentions of the government for the construction of the new parliament building is the age of the building; according to the government it is too old and it is not fit to run the parliament from such an old building.
The present parliament building was constructed during the British period and was made operational in 1927. So, this building is less than 100 years; 93 years old.
Let us have a look at some of the iconic parliament buildings of the world. The French parliament building was constructed in 1722, the Italian parliament building in 1871. Both the French and Italian parliaments function from these buildings. The German parliament building was constructed in 1894.
These buildings, including the Indian parliament building, represent not just the architectural manifestation of the period but also are linked to the traditions and customs of the region. The entire idea that the Indian parliament building is too old, is erroneously bogus.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court (SC) delivered a judgement on 10 petitions on January 5, 2021. The verdict of the SC is a fractured one with two judges, AM Khanwilkar and Dinesh Maheswari, disallowing the petitions to cancel the project, but Sanjiv Khanna registering a dissenting voice. So, with a 2:1 ratio, the verdict was delivered in favour of the government to go ahead with the Central Vista project.
Though the Central Vista project has been thoroughly reported in these columns, but it would be prudent for our readers to give a short note on how this project came into being.
The Central Vista precinct as it is called extends from the Rashtrapati Bhavan to the India Gate. It includes the North Block South Block, the Parliament building, and the central government secretariat buildings along the Rajpath all the way up to the India Gate circle and all the plots of land immediately around it.
According to the proposal, a redevelopment of the Central Vista is to take place, which shall include the construction of the new parliament building at the intersection of the triangle of the Red Cross Road and the Raisina Road.
Demolition of a few existing secretariat buildings like Shastri Bhavan, Rail Bhavan etc., as well as the National Museum, the ministry of external affairs building, vice-president residence and all other buildings along Rajpath with the now sole exception of National Archives. Also construction of new buildings at the site and at the IGNCA(Indra Gandhi National Centre for Arts).
The old buildings like the North Block and South Block shall be used as spaces for museums. A new PMO and his mansion residence adjoining the South Block will be constructed. The PM’s house shall be connected through an underground tunnel to the new PM office and to the new parliament. It is said this space will be nuclear attack resistant. Nearly, 2,500,000 square metres of construction will take place.

Objectives of the project 

According to the affidavit filled by the government of India in the Supreme Court the following objectives of the project were highlighted:
(i) Space constraint- Even after 73 years of independence, the nation does not have a common secretariat building; various ministries, due to lack of available space, have hired premises on rent.
(ii) Most of the existing buildings have outlived its structural life and are not earthquake resistant.
(iii) As there is no common central secretariat and ministries are spread over different locations, the resultant effect is administrative inefficiency and difficulty in inter-departmental coordination. This also leads to travelling, resulting in traffic congestion and pollution
(iv) Integrated functioning of all offices of the central government.
(v) To connect all the ministerial offices through an underground shuttle transportation system for the smooth performance of routine administrative functions.
(vi) The existing Parliament House was constructed during 1921-1927. It is too old.
(vii) By 2026, the number of seats in Lok Sabha would increase from 545. Both Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha are packed and would have no capacity for addition of seats when the number of seats would increase. To prepare the Houses of Parliament for emerging spatial requirements in light of the impending delimitation exercise.
(viii) To preserve the built heritage by not undertaking aggressive reconstruction activity on graded heritage structures on which only minimum renovation measures are permissible in law.

How did the matter reach SC?

Not going into the merits of the above reasons filed by the government of India which have been thoroughly countered in earlier columns, it is appropriate to mention that the main contention of the petition in the Supreme Court was to highlight the irregularities in the process of allowing the Central Vista project. 
The processes that had elements; environmental impact assessment, Central Vista committee approval, Delhi Urban Arts Commission approval, heritage approval by the Heritage Conservation Committee and most importantly the land use change.
The land-use change for the construction of the new parliament building was proposed by the Delhi Development Authority. After objections to the proposed change in land use were received by the DDA and public hearings were conducted there against, the petitioners (a group of people-architects, environmentalists and concerned citizens) approached the High Court of Delhi for challenging the public notice dated December 21, 2019.
The High Court vide order dated February 11, 2020, directed the DDA to inform the court before taking any step-in furtherance of the impugned public notice. However, the single judge who delivered this injunction was immediately transferred and a double bench of the High Court granted an ex-parte stay over the order thus allowing the DDA to go ahead with the land use change designs.
This was then challenged in the Supreme Court. Along with this petition, there were nine other petitions filed with different aspects of the Central Vista. The SC finally delivered the order on January 5, 2021, allowing the construction of Central Vista.

Main contentions of plea in SC

The foremost reason was that the land use of Plot No 2, measuring 9.5 acres of land opposite the parliament building, where the new parliament building is proposed is a designated district park. This area falls under the heritage zone and hence without the prior approval of the Heritage Conservation Committee, the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) could not have allowed changing the land use.
The second objection was that the Central Vista Committee was composed arbitrarily reducing the number of non-governmental architects and planners and filled with pro-government officials in order to rush up the construction of the Central Vista. And there was an apparent conflict of interest.
The third contention was the Delhi Urban Art Commission is a statutory body and hence consultation with it should have been taken at the planning stage itself. There was absence of comprehensive consultation and approval was granted in a selective manner. Instead of the entire Central Vista project, not just the parliament building should have been processed.
Volkshalle "envisioned" by Hitler
The fourth contention pertained to heritage approval. The government failed to consult the Heritage Conservation Committee, which is a body comprising experts in heritage structures. This committee was never consulted. The consultations should have been at the inception of the project stage and the design should have been got approved from this committee. 
Modi wants to leave imprint of legacy of his era, akin to what Hitler had envisioned through construction of Volkshalle in Berlin
The fifth objection was from the environmental clearance aspect. Instead of providing a comprehensive impact on the environment because of the entire Central Vista project the government got approval in a sectoral manner which definitely would be less in comparison to the cumulative impact of the entire project. The Expert Appraisal Committee that granted the clearance had no mandate to do so as the project is multi-sectoral and the body had no expertise to deal with such a project since the sectoral impact was not presented in the EAC.
If all the contentions are kept on record it smells that a big conspiracy was underneath to selectively choose and push the project violating procedures and processes that were developed both statutorily and through precedence.

Dissenting judgement

As reported the SC (in a ratio of 2 :1) set aside these objections and found out that the government did not violate in the processes. But is it true? The impugned order itself speaks about some of the processes that were not completed. The majority view was also of the opinion that the changes in the Central Vista project are minor and not substantial.
While setting aside the notification of the DDA, the dissenting judge, Sanjeev Khanna delivered this important verdict.
  1. The central government/authority would put on public domain on the web, intelligible and adequate information along with drawings, layout plans, with explanatory memorandum etc., within a period of seven days. 
  2. Public advertisement on the website of the Authority and the central government along with appropriate publication in the print media would be made within seven days. 
  3. Anyone desirous of filing suggestions/objections may do so within four weeks from the date of publication. Objections/suggestions can be sent by email or to the postal address which would be indicated/mentioned in the public notice. 
  4. The public notice would also notify the date, time and place when public hearing, which would be given by the Heritage Conservation Committee to the persons desirous of appearing before the said committee. 
  5. Objections/suggestions received by the Authority along with the records of BoEH and other records would be sent to the Heritage Conservation Committee. These objections etc., would also be taken into consideration while deciding the question of approval/permission. 
  6. Heritage Conservation Committee would decide all contentions in accordance with the Unified Building Bye-Laws and the Master Plan of Delhi. 
  7. Heritage Conservation Committee would be at liberty to also undertaken the public participation exercise if it feels appropriate and necessary in terms of paragraph 1.3 or other paragraphs of the Unified Building Bye Laws for consultation, hearing etc. It would also examine the dispute regarding the boundaries of the Central Vista Precincts at Rajpath. 

Flawed reasoning

The reasons or the arguments stated by the government to push ahead with the Central Vista are erroneously flawed.
Existing Parliament House and Central Vista are continuing and living heritage which must be preserved and protected for future generations. Re-development of nearly 80 acres of land, demolition of National Museum and construction of new Parliament will permanently affect the iconic character, skyline, layout, and the architectural harmony of the Central Vista. It would cause irreplaceable and non-revocable harm and damage Grade 1 heritage buildings and precincts.
Redevelopment, if required, should have been undertaken as per well-established norms applicable to places of historical interest. The exercise being undertaken fails to follow the best practices of heritage conservation.
No expert or specialised study and assessments has been undertaken and in absence, allegations of structural integrity, fire safety and seismic concerns etc. are mere reservations and misgivings.
There is no empirical data in support of the assertions made by the government that the Parliament House etc., has outlived its life, whereas there are living examples of how in the world buildings older than the Indian parliament continue to serve the purpose. No such doubt is raised in respect of other building constructed at the same time like the North and South Blocks and the President’s House.
Heritage assessment study should be undertaken and made public. Existing Parliament building can be upgraded. In alternative, expansion or additional construction rather than the construction of a new Parliament can be explored.
Office spaces, can be created near the official residence of the bureaucracy. Cost-benefit analysis has not been undertaken though significant capital expenditure in excess of Rs 20,000 crore apparently would be incurred. The capital cost would be higher as logistics, temporary housing cost and the cost of removal or transplantation of mature trees etc., have not been included.
Assertion that expenditure of Rs 1,000 crore per annum on account of rent etc., is unsupported by any document from the government and is just assumptive. Over a period of time, there has been a reduction of green area in the Central Vista, which is open and accessible to the general public. The public area would get further reduced with the redevelopment plan.
Zone ‘C’ where New India Gardens are proposed, is at a different location and not within Zone ‘D’, in which the Central Vista is located. Reduction in green/ recreational area in Central Vista, a prime and iconic place, cannot be compensated by a garden at a different location.
By the Constitution (84th Amendment Act), 2002 has extended the freeze on undertaking fresh delimitation as a part of national population strategy. Delimitation for the same reason may or may not take place. In any case, it would be after the next census post-2026, that is in 2031.
So, what is the inherent intent to push for a new parliament building so steadfast?
The government may veneer or sugar coat the real intentions of the project, but the hard fact remains that it is the prime minister who wants to ensure that this project including the new parliament building is built before the end of his term in 2024. He wants to leave an imprint of his glory and legacy, ‘the era -- Modi era’, akin to what Hitler had envisioned through the construction of the Volkshalle in Berlin.
What Albert Speer (personal architect of Adolf Hitler) could not do, as Germany went to war and could not complete the project, Bimal Patel, the chief architect of the new parliament building is planning for Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Something big and to the ethos and culture of fascism -- that is the model of the Central Vista.
Unfortunately, in dire times when the spending should be for people, a despot would inversely build castles! And this is what we are witnessing.
---
*Former deputy mayor, Shimla, political activist, renowned urban practitioner

Comments

TRENDING

Swami Vivekananda's views on caste and sexuality were 'painfully' regressive

By Bhaskar Sur* Swami Vivekananda now belongs more to the modern Hindu mythology than reality. It makes a daunting job to discover the real human being who knew unemployment, humiliation of losing a teaching job for 'incompetence', longed in vain for the bliss of a happy conjugal life only to suffer the consequent frustration.

How lead petitioner was rendered homeless when GM mustard matter came up in SC

By Rosamma Thomas*  On January 5, 2023, the Supreme Court stayed a December 20, 2022 direction of the Uttarakhand High Court to the Indian Railways and the district administration of Haldwani to use paramilitary forces to evict thousands of poor families occupying land that belonged to the railways.  Justice AS Oka remarked that it was not right to order the bringing in of paramilitary forces. The SC held that even those who had no rights, but were living there for years, needed to be rehabilitated. On December 21, 2022, just as she was getting ready to celebrate Christmas, researcher Aruna Rodrigues was abruptly evicted from her home in Mhow Cantonment, Madhya Pradesh – no eviction notice was served, and nearly 30 Indian Army soldiers bearing arms were part of the eviction process. What is noteworthy in this case is that the records establishing possession of the house date back to 1892 – the title deed with the name of Dr VP Cardoza, Rodrigues’ great grandfather, is dated November 14

Buddhist shrines were 'massively destroyed' by Brahmanical rulers: Historian DN Jha

Nalanda mahavihara By Our Representative Prominent historian DN Jha, an expert in India's ancient and medieval past, in his new book , "Against the Grain: Notes on Identity, Intolerance and History", in a sharp critique of "Hindutva ideologues", who look at the ancient period of Indian history as "a golden age marked by social harmony, devoid of any religious violence", has said, "Demolition and desecration of rival religious establishments, and the appropriation of their idols, was not uncommon in India before the advent of Islam".

Savarkar 'criminally betrayed' Netaji and his INA by siding with the British rulers

By Shamsul Islam* RSS-BJP rulers of India have been trying to show off as great fans of Netaji. But Indians must know what role ideological parents of today's RSS/BJP played against Netaji and Indian National Army (INA). The Hindu Mahasabha and RSS which always had prominent lawyers on their rolls made no attempt to defend the INA accused at Red Fort trials.

Tax buoyancy claims when less than 4% Indian dollar millionaires pay income tax

By Prasanna Mohanty  In FY18, the last year for which disaggregated income tax data is available, only 29,002 ITRs declared income above Rs 5 crore, while Credit Suisse said India had 7.25 lakh dollar millionaires (the wealth equivalent of Rs 8 crore and above) that year. Often enough, the Centre claims that demonetization in 2016 raised tax collections, improved tax efficiency, and expanded the tax base. Now RBI Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) member Ashima Goyal has also joined their ranks, attributing the “claims” of rising tax collections in the current fiscal year to “tax buoyancy” brought by the demonetisation . Do such claims have any basis in official records? The answer is unequivocal. The budget documents show the tax-to-GDP ratio (direct plus indirect tax) increased from 10.6% in FY16 (pre-demonetization) to 11.2% in FY17, remained there in FY18 (demonetization and GST fiscals), and then fell to 9.9% in FY20. In FY22, it improved to 10.8% and is estimated to drop to 10.7% in

Cyrus Mistry, PM Modi’s brother: What do these accidents have in common? Merc!

By Rosamma Thomas*  In September 2022, in an accident at Palghar near Mumbai, Cyrus Mistry, former chairman of the Tata Group, died in a road accident . On December 28, 2022, a road accident in Mysore left one of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s brothers injured. What is common in these accidents? The car that crashed into the divider on the road, in both these cases, was manufactured by “prestigious” German manufacturer Mercedes Benz. One former dealer of Mercedes Benz cars in India has been raising issues of the threat to the lives of those riding these cars for many years now. Cama Motors, among the oldest dealers of foreign cars, having started business in pre-independence India, noted over 10 years ago that Mercedes Benz was indulging in corrupt practices . The cars are currently priced between Rs 41 lakh and Rs 2.92 crore in India; few people realize that the pride of owning a Merc comes at considerable risk to life. Cama Motors carefully documented several of the flaws on a websi

Gandhian unease at Mahadev Desai book launch: Sabarmati Ashram may lose free space

By Rajiv Shah  A simmering apprehension has gripped the Gandhians who continue to be trustees of the Sabarmati Ashram: the “limited freedom” to express one’s views under the Modi dispensation still available at the place which Mahatma Gandhi made his home from 1917 to 1930 may soon be taken away. Also known as Harijan Ashram, a meeting held for introducing yet-to-be-released book, “Mahadev Desai: Mahatma Gandhi's Frontline Reporter”, saw speaker and after speaker point towards “narrowing space” in Gujarat for Gandhians (as also others) to express themselves. Penned by veteran journalist Nachiketa Desai, grandson of Mahadev Desai, while the book was planned to be released on January 1 and the meeting saw several prominent personalities, including actor-director Nandita Das, her scholar-mother Varsha Das, British House of Lords member Bhikhu Parekh, among others, speak glowingly about the effort put in for bringing out the book, exchanges between speakers suggested it should be rele

Civil rights leaders allege corporate loot of resources, suppression of democratic rights

By Our Representative  Civil rights activists have alleged, quoting top intelligence officers as also multiple international forensic reports, that recent developments with regard to the Bhima Koregaon and the Citizenship Amendment Act-National Register of Citizens (CAA-NRC) cases suggest, there was "no connection between the Elgaar Parishad event and the Bhima Koregaon violence." Activists of the Campaign Against State Repression (CASR) told a media event at the HKS Surjeet Bhawan, New Delhi, that, despite this, several political prisoners continue to be behind bars on being accused under the anti-terror the draconian Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. Addressed by family members of the political prisoners, academics, as well as social activists, it was highlighted how cases were sought to be fabricated against progressive individuals, democratic activists and intellectuals, who spoke out against "corporate loot of Indian resources, suppression of basic democratic

Kerala natural rubber producers 'squeezed', attend to their plight: Govt of India told

By Rosamma Thomas   Babu Joseph, general secretary of the National Federation of Rubber Producers Societies (NFRPS) at a recent discussion at Mahatma Gandhi University, Kottayam, explained that it is high time the Union government paid greater heed to the troubles plaguing the rubber production sector in India – rubber is a strategic product, important for the military establishment and for industry, since natural rubber is still used in the manufacture of tyres for large vehicles and aeroplanes. Synthetic rubber is now quite widespread, but styrene, which is used in making synthetic rubber and plastics, and also butadiene, another major constituent of synthetic rubber, are both hazardous. Prolonged exposure to these even in recycled rubber can cause neurological damage. Kerala produces the bulk of India’s natural rubber. In 2019-20, Kerala’s share in the national production of rubber was over 74%. Over 20% of the gross cropped area in the state is under rubber cultivation, with total

Bangladesh 'rights violations': US softens stance, fears increased clout of China, India

By Tilottama Rani Charulata*  In December 2021, in addition to the Rapid Action Battalion (RAB), the United States imposed sanctions on seven former and current officers of the force, alleging serious human rights violations. Benazir Ahmed and former RAB-7 commander Miftah Uddin Ahmed were banned from entering the US. RAB as an institution was also canceled the support it was getting from the US and its allies. At the same time, those under the ban have been notified of confiscation of assets held abroad. The anti-crime and anti-terrorism unit of the Bangladesh Police, RAB is the elite force consisting of members of the Bangladesh Army, Bangladesh Police, Bangladesh Navy, Bangladesh Air Force, Border Guard Bangladesh, Bangladesh Civil Service and Bangladesh Ansar, and has been criticized by rights groups for its use of extrajudicial killings and is accused of forced disappearances. The government of Bangladesh has been insisting about lifting the ban on RAB, but the US had till recen