Won't touch P. Orr & Sons, Metro Rail tells HC

Writ petition by INTACH

March 17, 2012 04:04 am | Updated November 16, 2021 11:26 pm IST - CHENNAI:

CHENNAI; 16/03/2012 : PORR and Sons building on Anna Salai. photo: K_Pichumani

CHENNAI; 16/03/2012 : PORR and Sons building on Anna Salai. photo: K_Pichumani

The Chennai Metro Rail on Friday submitted before the Madras High Court that it would not touch that portion of the P. Orr & Sons on Anna Salai which has been declared as a heritage structure. Recording the submission by the company's counsel, a Division Bench comprising Justices Elipe Dharma Rao and M. Venugopal posted a writ petition filed by the Indian National Trust for Art and Cultural Heritage (INTACH) for further arguments on March 19.

The INTACH prayed the court to restrain the authorities from demolishing, modifying or altering any part of the heritage structure.

The petitioner submitted that the building was designed by Robert Chisholm, consulting architect to the then Madras Government, who also designed the Madras University Senate House, Victoria Public Hall and the Central Railway Station. The structure was constructed in 1873. The authorities failed to see that the building was a Grade I heritage structure and that its value should not be permitted to be diminished in any manner. The Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority and the Chennai Corporation erred in permitting a part of the building to be demolished for Metrorail without considering the building's heritage value.

It has now come to light that acquisition process of a part of the land on which the building stands has been initiated. The proposal to demolish a part of the heritage structure listed in the Justice E. Padmanabhan committee report as Grade I, was completely a violation of the statutory norms in Development Control Rules.

The rules laid down special rules for conservation of heritage buildings which said that no development or redevelopment or engineering operations for additions/alterations/repairs/renovation, including the painting of the buildings, replacement of special features or demolition of the whole or part of the buildings or plastering of the buildings or precincts should be carried out except with the prior written permission from the CMDA.

The petitioner submitted that a comprehensive list of heritage buildings had not been identified and notified as directed by the Madras High Court in its April 29, 2010 order. Preservation of heritage structures was one of the mandates of the Constitution, the petitioner said.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.