Rebuilding New Delhi

The makeover of its central spaces must not be behind closed doors

Insufficient attention is being paid to the Union government’s plans for a massive redevelopment of the central Delhi area that houses its offices as well as the historical precincts of the Central Secretariat and the Parliament House. Some overall outlines of what is planned are known, or at least have been suggested: For example, the socialist-era buildings along the Central Vista, on either side of Rajpath between India Gate and Vijay Chowk, are likely to be demolished or redeveloped. It is also possible that some of the imperial-era buildings, including perhaps the current Parliament and Central Secretariat, will be turned into museums and their function carried out in new structures. But, overall, the expectations from the redevelopment and even its scope are being kept unnecessarily vague and ambiguous. What is known is that the design must “represent the values and aspirations of a New India” and also be “rooted in the Indian culture and social milieu”. These are, again, undefined and nebulous. The projected life of the buildings also seems selected at random — first 150, then 250 years.

In October, several firms submitted bids for the project, which is of unknown costs, though reported estimates vary from Rs 12,000 crore to Rs 25,000 crore. It was won by HCP Design, Planning and Management, an Ahmedabad-based firm associated with the landmark Sabarmati waterfront development, which was of then chief minister Narendra Modi’s talking points. It is not known how this winning design was picked, what the criteria were, and so on. The design places a grand new residence for the prime minister between where the Central Secretariat currently stands and the Rashtrapati Bhavan — an unfortunate development, which further undermines the core constitutional notion that the prime minister is in the end merely the first among equals in the Cabinet. What is going to be done to the historical princely houses along the India Gate hexagon is also unclear, as the publicly available information about the HCP bid suggests that some of them will become “support offices” for the secretariat. The redevelopment is supposed to be completed by 2024 — coincidentally, close to the time the next general elections are scheduled.

This project deserves far more scrutiny than it has so far received. If intended to last centuries, it cannot be built in less than five years and designed in secret. Which architects, conservationists, and heritage experts decided on the winning bid? Why were consultations not open? Why was it not the subject of a national discussion in keeping with the momentous nature of the transformation planned for what is, after all, the Indian Republic’s most sacred public space? Urban Development Minister Hardeep Singh Puri must increase transparency and consultation if he does not want his tenure’s legacy to be a hastily rebuilt Central Vista that is unpopular for decades to come. Most importantly, other implications of this redevelopment must also be noted. For example, a new Parliament building is supposed to include space for a larger number of Lok Sabha members. Is it the case that the delimitation of constituencies, still a few years away, will see an expansion of Hindi heartland MPs, while other states that have controlled their population retain their current number of MPs? Questions would be asked whether it is part of the reason for maintaining such secrecy behind this change.