'NDMC gets SC nod to raze Chanakya, to raise theatre of dreams'
http://cities.expressindia.com/fullstory.php?newsid=253931
'Supreme Court paves the way for Chanakya demolition'
http://www.hindu.com/2007/09/01/stories/2007090158700100.htm
===
As far as i know, the litigation was a licensor-licensee affair and the redevelopment needs to follow its own due process. So first thing Monday 3 sep i went over to request clarification about the implausible connection in the reports of Saturday 1 (and no precipitate action meanwhile). On Tuesday 4 there is press quote from SPA Director conveying implausible (SPA?) opinion to the effect that there is no cause for concern or caution, about which i am dispatching the following:
===
Prof Subir K Saha
Director, SPA,
...
Sub: Chanakya Cinema
Dear Prof Saha,
This is about your quote in an item titled ‘Why pull down Chanakya?’ on p.5 of Hindustan Times dated 04-09-07 (“Though some people can be emotionally attached to the structure, I feel its rightful owner can modify it if they want. The new building should, however, merge well with the surrounding buildings like Akbar Bhawan and Yashwant Place”).
Since you are quoted as SPA Director without disclaimer, I assume you were briefing the press about SPA opinion. However, SPA opinion is not clear from the quote / report and I request the following (in form of SPA press release / briefing note or other records):
1. SPA opinion on how a public authority ‘owning’ significant public architecture ‘can’, if it ‘wants’, modify the same without transparency either about its ‘wanting’ or about its compliance with the due processes for development / redevelopment that it can NOT circumvent (including due processes that provide opportunity for wider scrutiny and comment)
2. SPA opinion on what needs to ‘merge well’ with what at the site (which has been repeatedly studied at the SPA)
3. SPA opinion on ‘emotional attachment’ / ‘feeling’ of unemotional detachment about Chanakya Cinema (creation of one of its senior-most professors, with both building and Architect highly regarded by many who have been in and out of SPA -- including some who now regard the building also with emotion because its Architect Professor PN (Kuki) Mathur passed away three months ago).
I hope you will publish the above expeditiously.
My letter I am simultaneously posting to mailing lists. Since the SPA Director’s quote conveys that there is no cause for concern or caution, I also find it necessary to send copies to authorities to whom I have made yesterday requests (as myself, detached from the SPA and the professions that it educates) for clarifications related to point no.1 above and for ensuring no precipitate action is taken to pull down Chanakya Cinema.
Yours sincerely
Gita Dewan Verma
===
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.
http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545469
http://cities.expressindia.com/fullstory.php?newsid=253931
'Supreme Court paves the way for Chanakya demolition'
http://www.hindu.com/2007/09/01/stories/2007090158700100.htm
===
As far as i know, the litigation was a licensor-licensee affair and the redevelopment needs to follow its own due process. So first thing Monday 3 sep i went over to request clarification about the implausible connection in the reports of Saturday 1 (and no precipitate action meanwhile). On Tuesday 4 there is press quote from SPA Director conveying implausible (SPA?) opinion to the effect that there is no cause for concern or caution, about which i am dispatching the following:
===
Prof Subir K Saha
Director, SPA,
...
Sub: Chanakya Cinema
Dear Prof Saha,
This is about your quote in an item titled ‘Why pull down Chanakya?’ on p.5 of Hindustan Times dated 04-09-07 (“Though some people can be emotionally attached to the structure, I feel its rightful owner can modify it if they want. The new building should, however, merge well with the surrounding buildings like Akbar Bhawan and Yashwant Place”).
Since you are quoted as SPA Director without disclaimer, I assume you were briefing the press about SPA opinion. However, SPA opinion is not clear from the quote / report and I request the following (in form of SPA press release / briefing note or other records):
1. SPA opinion on how a public authority ‘owning’ significant public architecture ‘can’, if it ‘wants’, modify the same without transparency either about its ‘wanting’ or about its compliance with the due processes for development / redevelopment that it can NOT circumvent (including due processes that provide opportunity for wider scrutiny and comment)
2. SPA opinion on what needs to ‘merge well’ with what at the site (which has been repeatedly studied at the SPA)
3. SPA opinion on ‘emotional attachment’ / ‘feeling’ of unemotional detachment about Chanakya Cinema (creation of one of its senior-most professors, with both building and Architect highly regarded by many who have been in and out of SPA -- including some who now regard the building also with emotion because its Architect Professor PN (Kuki) Mathur passed away three months ago).
I hope you will publish the above expeditiously.
My letter I am simultaneously posting to mailing lists. Since the SPA Director’s quote conveys that there is no cause for concern or caution, I also find it necessary to send copies to authorities to whom I have made yesterday requests (as myself, detached from the SPA and the professions that it educates) for clarifications related to point no.1 above and for ensuring no precipitate action is taken to pull down Chanakya Cinema.
Yours sincerely
Gita Dewan Verma
===
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.
http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545469