Naveen S Garewal
Tribune News Service
Hyderabad, June 27
Telangana Chief Minister K Chandrashekhar Rao (KCR) on Thursday laid the foundation of a new grand Secretariat and Legislative Assembly ignoring all opposition to going ahead with the same on account of demolishing the existing Secretariat, which is in good standing and a heritage building called Errum Manzil which will house the new Assembly.
The groundbreaking ceremony was performed in the presence of several Telangana Rashtra Samithi (TRS) leaders including the entire Cabinet amidst performing of religious ceremonies.
Architect Hafeez Contractor is designing the Secretariat building.
The chief minister who is a strong believer in Vaastu did not use the Secretariat for official work during his entire term since 2014 and operated out of his residence and camp office.
The Secretariat building will cost over Rs 400 crore and will come up at the existing place opposite the Hussain Sagar Lake.
KCR also laid the foundation stone for a brand new Rs 100 crore legislature buildings complex at the Errum Manzil complex, a Nizam-era building, in the heart of the city.
There have been protests and even filing of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) against demolishing Errum Manzil, but the chief minister has decided to go ahead with building both Secretariat and Assembly structures that have been approved by the Cabinet.
The descendants of late Nawab Fakhrul Mulk Bhahadur, who had built the Errum Manzil, have appealed to the Telangana Government not to demolish the 19th century palace.
The PIL against the demolition of the two buildings is listed to come up before the Telangana High Court tomorrow.
The main contention in the petition is that the government did not consult Archaeological Survey of India or Indian National Trust for Art and Cultural Heritage (INTACH) before taking a decision to demolish a Nizam-era building.
Errum Manzil, the place selected for the new state assembly was built in 1870 by Nawab Safdar Jung Musheer-ud-Daula Fakhrul Mulk.
Though, the building is not a designated heritage building, but given the era of construction the petitioner has questioned the government decision to go ahead without seeking the consent of the heritage committee.
Pulling down the building would be violation of heritage laws.
Unlock Exclusive Insights with The Tribune Premium
Take your experience further with Premium access.
Thought-provoking Opinions, Expert Analysis, In-depth Insights and other Member Only Benefits
Already a Member? Sign In Now