In a surprising administrative lapse, the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation (AMC) has conceded that a modern high-rise building and a family's old bungalow in Khanpur were incorrectly included in the city's list of protected heritage structures. This admission came before the Gujarat High Court, which is hearing a petition filed by a 96-year-old woman and her family.
A Family's Struggle for Basic Repairs
Freny Jinwalla, aged 96, along with her three children, approached the High Court after their repeated pleas to the civic body went unanswered. Their bungalow, located near Firdaus Apartments, was listed as a heritage structure, which prevented them from obtaining necessary permissions to repair their deteriorating property. The family had formally requested the AMC to remove their bungalow from the list on September 9, but no action was taken.
Arguing before the court, the family's counsel stated that the bungalow was in a dilapidated condition and urgently needed repairs. They emphasized that the structure did not possess the architectural or historical significance warranting a heritage tag and that the restrictions were causing significant hardship to the elderly petitioner.
The Root of the Confusion: A Survey Number Error
The core of the issue lies in the land survey records. The property stands on land originally marked as City Survey No. 3544/A in Shahpur ward. This plot was later divided into ten sub-plots. The Jinwalla family's bungalow occupies sub-plots 3544/A/3 and 5 to 10. The adjacent sub-plots, 3544/A/1, 2, and 4, are home to the Firdaus Apartments, a high-rise building of the Kashturbhai Cooperative Housing Society.
However, the AMC's heritage list erroneously included all constructions on the entire original survey number, 3544/A. This blanket designation meant that the modern high-rise apartment building was, inexplicably, granted heritage status alongside older constructions.
Court Proceedings and the AMC's Admission
During the court hearing, the AMC's counsel, G H Virk, presented a crucial submission. As recorded in the court order, he stated that it appeared "by inadvertent error, the entire original City Survey No. 3544/A has been declared in the heritage structure list." He further acknowledged that the existence of a high-rise on part of this land was not in dispute.
Justice Mauna Bhatt, upon reviewing the case, noted in her order, "Upon perusal of the record, it is noticed that the entire area of land bearing Survey No. 3544/A which was subsequently divided into ten subplots is now forming part of the heritage structure list."
High Court's Directive and Wider Implications
Taking into account the advanced age of Freny Jinwalla and the precarious state of her bungalow, the High Court directed the concerned authorities to take a final decision on the family's representation within four weeks. This case has shed light on a broader problem, as several other old constructions in the city are believed to be incorrectly listed, trapping their owners in a similar predicament where they cannot maintain or repair their own homes due to erroneous heritage classification.
The revelation that Firdaus Apartments may be the only high-rise in Ahmedabad with a heritage tag—a fact the AMC seemed unaware of—highlights significant flaws in the process of cataloging and protecting the city's architectural heritage. It underscores the need for a thorough review of the existing list to prevent such errors from causing undue distress to property owners.
