The ‘Adopt a Heritage’ scheme of the government of India, under which Dalmia Bharat Private Limited has been allowed to ‘adopt’ the Red Fort, has created a stormy debate in heritage and conservation circles. A few have supported it arguing that it will only help in the upkeep of old structures and that the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) will still control the monument itself.

Under the scheme, Golconda Fort and Charminar, Hyderabad, protected monuments of the ASI, are under active consideration in Phase II. In this context, it will be useful to consider the example of Naya Qila, a 17th-century structure which is a part of the larger Golconda Fort complex and which was leased out to a private sporting association some years ago.

The deal was between the Telangana (then Andhra Pradesh) Tourism Development Corporation and Hyderabad Golf Association (HGA) that began in 2002 through a deed of license – executed on the basis of ‘in-principle approval’ given by ASI Delhi dated November 29, 2001. Many had argued that it was in violation of the Ancient Monuments Archaeological Sites and Remains Act,(AMASR Act) 1958.

Since then, the Golconda Fort-Naya Qila has been used as a golf course. In order to blatantly facilitate golfing activity, the structure of the monument, site and remains of ancient heritage walls of Golconda Fort-Naya Qila were broken, blasted, dumped and remodelled in utter disregard of the destruction. Some officials tried to stop this, but their efforts failed when ASI Delhi approved the changes after it was given a go-ahead by the then tourism secretary Chandana Khan and chief minister Chandrababu Naidu.

The systemic devastation

Initially, the plan was to set up a birds sanctuary; this changed when the erstwhile Andhra Pradesh government proposed a golf course in 50 acres of Naya Qila-Golconda. The then secretary (culture), R.V.V. Ayyar, the then director general, ASI, New Delhi and then superintending archaeologist, Hyderabad Circle, in 1998 had opposed the idea of a golf course inside fort walls stating that “AMASR Act does not permit such activities and it is beyond his purview to grant permission” and that “Land proposed for golf course is not ideal because of its location inside the fort wall and requested to look for alternate locations outside the fortification” as well as that “Due to the quantum of land required by APTDC (Andhra Pradesh Tourism Development Corporation) and the need for intense manipulation of natural regimens the new golf course and the expansion of the existing golf course inside the Heritage Monument is being generally discouraged all over the world.”

These are all available in the official letters submitted to the court in March 2017 in a petition that I had filed.

However, on November 29, 2001, the director general of ASI gave an in-principle approval for setting up of a golf course within the fort walls of Golconda Fort-Naya Qila in an area roughly measuring 50 acres for landscaping purpose subject to observation of certain conditions by the state government and subject to approval of golf layout plan inside and outside the fort walls. Based upon the in-principle approval, the deed of license was signed in February 2002 between Hyderabad Golf Association and Tourist Development Corporation.

In violation of all regulations, the Golf Association has been restricting the free entry of the public through all entrances to Naya Qila and preventing their free movement inside the monument. During a visit, the security of the club registers the names and mobile numbers of tourists. Golf security guards track those tourists who resist registration. CCTV surveillance cameras have been fixed on fort walls and some places of tourist interest are encircled by barbed wire. Signboards have been put up at many places reading “trespassers will be prosecuted” and/or “Golf course project”.

The chabutras (huge elevated stone platforms) that are a part of the monument are being used for the golf course as tees by raising the level of the surrounding area. Tees have also been laid on fort walls at multi-levels and inside the water body.

The public can access barely 10% of the wall. Similarly, public access to the 13 burges, the cannon, watchtower, surangs, chabutra and water channels has been stopped. The ambience and character of the skyline of the area have been destroyed.

The stone bund of Naya Qila talab was blasted, heritage sluices and weir were made defunct, and were cemented to lay pipes underneath the bund. Irrigation channels that nourished Qutub Shahi gardens and bowlis inside Naya Qila talab were obliterated. The Naya Qila talab was filled over, which is when Save Our Urban Lakes (SOUL) filed a case in the high court in 2013 that officials and district collector of Hyderabad have included it in the notified water bodies list and declared its area as 28 acres.

There has been a complete destruction of wetlands and migratory birds have not returned. Hundreds of trees inside Naya Qila were burnt. Cases were filed in the high court against the environmental ruin perpetrated by Tourism Development Corporation and ASI. HGA was directed to compensate, which it never did.

Since Golconda Fort was on the tentative world heritage list, UNESCO wrote to the ASI in 2009 about the “negative impact of golf course on Golconda Fort monument” and sought “information on steps taken to protect the fort and its surroundings”.

There was more international pressure in 2009, when Robert Simpkins of San Jose State University wrote to the ASI and the chairman of APTDC stating that the heritage tag of Golconda Fort is in danger and the lease should be cancelled so that the “site integrity of Golconda-Naya Qila can be protected as it retains great site integrity”.

The ASI Hyderabad in its ‘Report on genesis and illegalities of HGA’ as well as in its affidavit filed before the high court held government agencies including the municipal corporation, water board and the HGA responsible for the destruction inflicted on Golconda-Naya Qila.

It is pertinent to note here that in spite of illegalities and breach of contract on multiple counts, and without an approved golf layout plan in place, the ASI still trusted the Golf Association, and an MOU was signed on September 23, 2009 between the ASI New Delhi and secretary tourism with Clause 8 seeking that ‘layout plan of the entire Golf Course including the completed portion, both within the fort walls and outside, is submitted to the ASI by Hyderabad Golf Association for its approval before commencement of any further work’. This in spite of stiff opposition from ASI Hyderabad officials at the time.

In fact, the managing director of Telangana tourist department, secretary of tourist, and superintending archaeologist of ASI Hyderabad are ex-officio members of the HGA managing committee. Further, under the deed of license, that ‘bye-laws/rules of HGA membership provide for membership of service officers present and past of government of India, Telangana government and Licensor (Telangana Tourism Corporation), as communicated by Licensor from time to time.’ Thus official patronage is embedded and creates vested interest to continue with MoU and to not proceed against the Golf Association.

As per the license deed, the HGA pays an annual fee of Re 1 per acre. Even with such invaluable government aid, the HGA replied to an RTI query regarding details of names of members and membership fee saying that the Hyderabad Golf Association does not come under the purview of the RTI. The tourism department simply forwarded the evasive RTI reply to the RTI applicant.

Opposition

NGOs, people’s collectives, prominent veteran activists had objected to this plunder through protests, and SOUL, Forum for Better Hyderabad have been filing cases in high court, protesting and lodging complaints. After intense research for collating official correspondence to highlight internal resistance to golf course inside a protected monument, and further conducting detailed visits of prohibited areas in Naya Qila, I filed a public interest litigation in March 2017 to get the golf course evicted and have Naya Qila opened up for the public which is still being heard.

During visits to Golconda Fort-Naya Qila, I had observed that ASI and its associates have failed to maintain the historical monuments and failed to adhere to provisions which were agreed upon in the MoU and Deed of License and compliance of AMASR Act.

The sanctity of protected monuments – that they ought to be kept intact completely devoid of any artificial or modern additions that would eventually dilute its archaeological significance – was not taken care of. The maintenance and protection of the ancient monuments and archaeological sites cannot be entrusted to private parties. There is also no mechanism to ensure that the monuments and sites covered would be kept intact. Thus, the director, Archaeological Survey of India ought not to have agreed in principle to the proposal to set up a golf course within the walls/precincts of the Golconda Fort-Naya Qila.

Thus, a part of Golconda-Naya Qila is locked up in a court battle because citizens have protested against it being handed over to a club. As a petitioner for eviction of the golf course and restoration of Golconda-Naya Qila for the public, I wonder therefore how a ‘Vision Bid’ can be submitted by a private organisation to further give the sponsorship of the fort under the ‘Monument Mitra’ programme of the government of India. There is every reason to be sceptical about the ‘Adopt a Heritage’ scheme.

Lubna Sarwath is a heritage rights activist based in Hyderabad and had filed the petition against the Hyderabad Golf course that is being heard in the High Court of Hyderabad.