The Hindu, dated February 23, reported on the High Court of Madras expressing its shock that the Tamil Nadu Heritage Commission Act, 2012, had not yet been brought into force. Twelve years is a long period of time, even going by government standards. The High Court has every right to be upset at this delay, for without it, we would not even have a Heritage Act, whether in force or not. And looking back, even the story of how that Act came about is part of the city’s heritage and lore.
It all began in the 1980s when Bentinck’s Buildings, which stood where Singaravelar Maligai, the Collectorate of Chennai, on Rajaji Salai now is, was demolished. This was despite appeals even from the Prime Minister’s Office! The next battle concerned the DGP Building on the Marina, which in the 1990s was planned to be replaced with a ten-storey structure. The heritage activists won that case, with the High Court, after a detailed study, ordering the preservation of the structure.
Other heritage buildings were not so lucky. One of the most famous such cases involved the old Madras Club premises on Express Estates, wherein it became clear that in the absence of a Heritage Act, there can be no protection for such structures. There was hope of that becoming reality when in 2010, the High Court, in connection with a batch of cases pertaining to landmarks such as Gokhale Hall and Bharat Insurance Building, ordered the enumeration of heritage edifices in the city and State, and recommended that the State form a Heritage Conservation Committee (HCC) to study each case that came up and make its recommendation. The court also, most helpfully, provided a list of 467 heritage structures and precincts in the city, which it sourced from a committee that had been formed to investigate outdoor advertising issues.
The government hemmed and hawed thereafter, and in course of time did form the HCC under the auspices of the CMDA. The composition was essentially one-sided, with the majority of members being from the government, its departments, and institutions under its control. The representative of the Indian National Trust for Arts and Cultural Heritage (INTACH) was probably the only outsider. Preparation of a fresh list of heritage structures began in a tardy manner, though why such an exercise was warranted when the High Court had already given one was never answered. In the meanwhile, even as INTACH was thrown out of the committee following litigation on the P Orr & Sons building demolition to make way for Metrorail, the government itself went ahead and demolished a few buildings that were in the High Court list. These were sacrificed post haste to make way for the Assembly-cum-Secretariat that is now a hospital.
In 2012 came the Heritage Act, which proposed the formation of a fresh HCC with roughly the same mandate. With that, the status of the earlier HCC became unclear but the enumeration of heritage buildings was never stopped and for all I know, it is still ongoing, 12 years later, with little to show for it. And, with the Act of 2012 being just on paper, the HCC was never formed.
The irony is that the government itself has become a proponent of heritage conservation in the interregnum. Its PWD now has a conservation wing and is executing several projects most commendably. It is just that without an Act in place, any conservation activity will depend on the whims of who is in office. If heritage conservation is to be enshrined as a matter of policy, it needs an Act that is in force.
(V. Sriram is a writer and historian.)
