BOMBAY HERITAGE ACT
URBAN CONSERVATION SUB COMMITTEE FOR GREATER BOMBAY
On 11TH JANUARY 1988 a letter was sent from Urban Development Department,
Government of Maharashtra to various heritage groups stating :
1. There were no regulations for conservation of historical/architectural buildings in
Bombay and elsewhere
2. And further proposed to add a new chapter on conservation in the development plan of
Bombay
3. It was also proposed to modify the development control rules for greater Bombay.
• Therefore a list was enclosed with the letter : 145 buildings. 7 conservation areas and 9
design control zones including a draft of Development Control Rules for Conservation.
• This great step was not just for historical or monumental buildings but also included
architectural buildings for protection.
• A regulation was drafted to form the basis for further action.
• Over all and most importantly was it stated explicitly that heritage preservation was not
just for Bombay but also in other parts of State.
FORMATION OF HERITAGE COMMITTEE FOR BOMBAY
On 27th August 1990 a Heritage
Committee was constituted vide Furthermore, after urging,
Maharashtra Government Government of India , vide its
Resolution by Maharashtra letter of 31st October 1990
Government Urban Development circulated this Maharashtra
Minister. Government Resolution of 27th
This formation was done so that a August 1990 to the Chief
Formal Committee would be Secretaries of all State
formed which would have greater Government and requested
validity. them to consider taking
It would minimize the chances of similar action to identify and
the Heritage Resolution and the conserve the precious
Heritage List being stuck down by heritage of every particular
the High Court on the basis of state of India.
arbitrariness or non application.
It would also serve as a precedent
for similar action elsewhere.
HERITAGE LIST OF GREATER BOMBAY
A total of about 935 objections/
A preliminary heritage list On 20th February 1991 suggestions were received; each
for Greater Bombay was Government published one was called for hearing. Many
submitted to Government the draft Heritage List said heritage was a great idea but
vide letter of 5th for Greater Bombay. suggested that their building
September 1990 by the Though the heritage list should be excluded from the
Chairman of Heritage was still just a draft heritage list. After the hearing :-
Committee. published for the 1. The draft regulation was
The letter pointed out invitation of public proposed to be considerably be
that :- comments, it had the diluted.
1. The list was a force of law. 2. A large no of buildings and
preliminary one which The statutory backing precincts were proposed to
would need amendment. came from section 46 of deleted from the list.
2. Government could send the MRTP Act. 3. A no of buildings were
the list to Municipal For the first time in proposed to be downgraded
Corporation which Bombay – and with minor from Grade II to Grade III;
could then have due exceptions, in India – reason they had large amount
regard to this list heritage buildings and of open spaces around them
while granting precincts, other than which as per the draft
development archaeological, had legal regulation did not permit the
permissions. protection. construction of additional
buildings in the compounds.
GOVERNMENT SANCTION TO HERITAGE REGULATION AND LIST OF
GRETAER BOMBAY
On 21st April 1995 Government conveyed their sanction to Development Control
Regulation No. 67 i.e., the heritage regulation.
On 24th April 1995, Government conveyed their sanction to the heritage list.
In their gazette of 25th April 1995, Government laid down qualifications for
membership of the Heritage Conservation Committee whose role is to advice the
Municipal Commissioner about the grant or refusal of building permission to heritage
buildings and precincts.
Also on 25th April 1995, Government wrote to the Municipal Commissioner of Greater
Bombay which contained several statutory directives:-
1. A directive that the Heritage Conservation Committee consider whether to include
in the list those additional buildings and precincts recommended by people.
2. A directive to re-examine the deletions made by the Government.
3. A directive to must examine the question of adding seven large additional precincts.
On 26th April 1995 issued a directive to the Municipal Commissioner to bring the above
into force with immediate effect and giving a time limit of four months for completing
the tasks of re-examining the deletions and for examining the addition of additional
buildings and precincts to the list.
THANK YOU
HARSHITA PAREEK
180504
B.ID IV YEAR
