See Responsible development

the present photo is made from

• https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Before_demolition_old_building_of_Darbhanga_Palace_(Varanasi).JPG
• https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Demolition_old_building_of_Darbhanga_Palace_(Varanasi)_1996.jpg
• https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:New_building_of_Darbhanga_Palace_(Varanasi)_(2012).JPG
• https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Work_in_progress_of_the_new_building_of_Darbhanga_Palace_(Varanasi)_2006.jpg

___________________________

Public Interest Litigation - Allahabad High COurt - PIL 31229 of 2005 - "The photographic evidence below taken by the petitioner clearly shows that the old building is G, G+1 and that the new construction is G, G+1, G+2, G+3 and is therefore completely illegal and that the Respondents 6 to 8 have never shown the Hon’ble High Court these perspectives and these photographs of the Darbhanga Palace."

___________________________________________

INTACH in its 1992 listings and grading of Heritage Buildings on the Ganga riverfront ghats in Varanasi had declared the Darbhanga Palace, located at D-20/17 A, B, C and D-20/16, Munshi Ghat, originally built around 1860, as a heritage building as having Grade 1 status, implying that no modification could be permitted in any portion of the structure of the building. The Darbhanga Palace has been given the Grade 1 status even in the recent list of Heritage Buildings in Varanasi compiled by INTACH-Delhi as part of the Heritage Development Plan that it has prepared for VDA in 2009. INTACH Delhi never did and never could suport the demolition of the old structure of the Darbhanga Palace and the construction of a totally new structure. Instead, the advise of INTACH-Delhi has always been only to restore, rehabilitate and repair the Darbhanga Palace, as is evident in INTACH-Delhi’s letters to VDA dated January 8, 2003 and 10 April 1996, declaring and confirming that the Darbhanga Palace is a “heritage structure/building” and that the owners intend “retaining the original charatcer of the building”. . INTACH-Delhi, in the same letter, goes on to say that the Darbhanga Palace is in an area identified in an INTACH-Delhi study of 1986 as containing “the most valuable ensemble of elements of the heritage to be conserved”. That in the letter INTACH-Delhi further says that “no substantial change to what existed was being attempted except as necessitated by placing internal partitions for defining room and other functional areas”. See Annexure 3 on page # . The owners of the Darbhanga Palace confirmed that they wished to “maintain the original charatcer of the Palace by restoring/preserving the elevation and other salient fatures of the palace. The Darbhanga Palace is located in a heritage zone: The Darbhanga Palace is located on the Ganga riverfront ghats that is a heritage zone as declared by the VDA in its Master Development Plans (2001-2011 and 2013-2031) and where all new construction is prohibited as per the U.P. State government orders of 1998, 2000, 2001; The Darbhanga Palace is located within 300metre radius of an ASI protected monument which is a heritage zone; Since the Darbhanga Palace is a heritage building and is also located in a heritage zone and that since, as per Article 3.2.12 of the 2009 U.P. State Government Compounding bye laws, VDA cannot compound any new construction located in a heritage zone In a response to an RTI query made by the petitioner, the VDA states that the compounding of the new construction of the Darbhanga Palace (as per the map attached in the VDA affidavit dated 18.04.2013) was done in accordance with VDA bye laws of 2008 and U.P. State Government Compounding Bye laws of 2009. The Article 3.2.12 of the U.P. State Government Compounding bye laws of 2009 clearly states that no compounding is permitted in a heritage zone. Therefore, by compounding the new illegal G, G+1, G+2, G+3 construction on the West Side (back side) and South side of the Darbhanga Palace, the VDA has blatantly violated the norms and regulations of the U.P. State Government and has violated the conditional NOC given by ASI that the VDA itself considers an indispensable condition in its own Bye Laws. The Articles 3.1.9 and 3.1.10 of the VDA Bye laws of 2008 clearly state that permission within 200metres of the Ganga riverfront ghats will be given only for repair and restoration and that permission within 300metres of an ASI protected Monument will be given only after ASI issues an NOC. Therefore, by compounding the new illegal G, G+1, G+2, G+3 construction on the West Side (back side) and South side of the Darbhanga Palace, the VDA has blatantly also violated its own bye laws for heritage zones. See Annexure 8 on page # with relevant page of VDA Bye Laws . On all pages of the map of the Darbhanga Palace, attached by VDA to its affidavit of 18.04.2013, it is written “Restoration and reconstruction of Darbhanga Palace into a Heritage Hotel”. That if the Darbhanga Palace was only being restored and rehabiltated, why did VDA even need to compound the building? In the map on pages 74 and 75 of its affidavit dated 18.04.2013, the VDA clearly state that the construction being compounded is a new construction. As per Article 3.2.3. of the VDA bye laws, hotels located in residential areas require 12 metre wide road access. Therefore, as per article 3.2.3. of the VDA bye laws, VDA could not give the permission for “restoration” to the Darbhanga Palace to build a hotel and that this sanctioned map must therefore be considered null and void. The VDA is inconsistent and false in hiding the fact that they have compounded the illegal construction of an entire floor by sometimes stating that it is mezzanine and at other times stating that it is upper level. That in its affidavit dated 18.04.2013 on pg 60, and page 97, the VDA states that the G, G+1, G+2 (mezzanine) and G+2 are new constructions, and then on page 100 as well as the attached map, VDA states it approved the constructions of G, G+1, G+2 (upper level) and G+2. That the new illegal constructions of the Darbhanga Palace are neither mezzanine nor upper level but an entire G+3 floor and that the VDA bye laws do not include any article on a “upper level” construction; The VDA and the respondents 6 to 8, owners of the Darbhanga Palace, are concealing further true facts and are misleading the court about the completely new and illegal G, G+1, G+2, G+3 construction on the West Side (back side) and South side of the Darbhanga Palace, clearly demonstrating that VDA is hand in glove with the owners of the Darbhanga Palace: The Sale Deeds executed in 24 May 1995 by Respondents 6 to 8, for purchase of the Darbhanga Palace, located at D-20/17A, B, C and D-20/16, Munshi Ghat, clearly states that the orignal building of the Darbhanga Palace was only one floor. The Tax Assessment of the Nagar Nigam Varanasi for the Darbhanga Palace, located at D-20/17A, B, C and D-20/16, Munshi Ghat, clearly states that the building is a 2 floor construction. Despite the Darbhanga Palace being located within 300 metres of an ASI protected monument, the VDA have never ever asked the Darbhanga Palace owners to seek an NOC from the ASI neither before approving the building/construction map in 1997 and neither before rendering once again valid the same map on 26.05.2001. Despite the FIRs filed by ASI that clearly showed that the owners of the Darbhanga Palace were building illegal constructions, by going ahead to compound the same building, VDA violated the very NOC of the ASI and ignored the FIRs filed by ASI (in July 2003 and 8 April 2005); See Annexure 12 on page for the FIRs filed by ASI and See Annexure 13 on page for the NOC given by ASI for the restoration of the Darbhanga Palace The affidavit dated 22 April 2013 and in earlier affidavits, the Respondents 6 to 8 have never shown the old photographs (giving clear persepctive of the building) of the West (Back side) and of the South Side portion of their building, as instead is clearly visible in the old photographs below taken by the petitioner, that they completely demolished and on which they made a completely new higher and bigger construction. VDA has, without appropriate justifications, violated the orders issued by Mr. Bhullar, then Vice Chairman of VDA, in a letter dated 27 Feb 2001, cancelling the approval of the map for the Darbhanga Palace proposed in 1997, stating that as per the Government Order of 31 July 2000, no hotel construction would be permitted along the River Ganga in areas that are connected with pilgrimage and religious beliefs and that the previous approved plan of 26 April 1997 thereby stood cancelled. The fact of VDA repeatedly sealing the Darbhanga Palace since the latter continued to make illegal constructions (for ex: in 23.06.2003, 16.04.2005), violating NOCs and laws, government orders, is in itself evident that the VDA has considered the construction as illegal right from 2001. The owners of the Darbhanga Palace, located at D-20/17A, B, C and D-20/16, Munshi Ghat, have continued to build and complete a totally new and illegal G, G+1, G+2, G+3 construction on the West Side (back side) and South side of the Darbhanga Palace, violating the NOCs given by ASI and VDA as is evident in the FIRs filed by ASI and violating the judgment given by the Hon’ble High Court of Allahabad and as is evident in the photographs. The owners of the Darbhanga Palace violated (as is evident from the photographs below), the FIRs filed by ASI and the NOC given by ASI, on 20 July 2004, that included the following conditions: i. The outward appearance and original height of the building must remain unchanged ii. No alterations and modifications can be made and original texture of the building must remain the same iii. No hoarding must be placed over the monument iv. Any structure of historical importance which has been in existence for more than 75 years must not be demolished v. The building must be utilised only for the purposes for which the license was requested: restoration, conservation and renovation vi. Appropriate breathing space should be ensured around the building B. the owners of the Darbhanga Palace violated (as is evident from the photographs below) the conditions of VDA, as stated in its letter of 14 August 2001, (see Annexure 15 on pg ): i. permission given to the building was only for restoration/ rehabilitation, ii. name of the palace must not be changed, iii. approval was not for making a hotel; iv. owners would have to take a license for utilising the building as a hotel.

The owners of the Darbhanga Palace violated (as is evident from the photographs below) the VDA approval letter for rehabilitation of the Darbhanga Palace, dated 3 March 2005, the VDA explicitly stated that: i. all construction in the Darbhanga Palace must be absolutely the same as the previous construction; ii. if, under any condition, the rehabilitation/ construction is not according to permission granted, the map will be considered cancelled. iii. Rehabilitation has to compulsorily be according to the conditions laid down in the NOC given by ASI on 20 July 2004 (see points 8, 9, 10 and 11 in Annexure 16 on page ) D. the owners of the Darbhanga Palace also violated the judgement made, on 22 Jan 2008, by the judge bench comprising Justice Amitava Lala and Justice V.C. Mishra, permitting the owners of the Darbhanga palace to only remodel/ restructure the building with appropriate sanction of VDA, thus committing a “Contempt of Court”.

In Para 17 of the affidavit, dated 22 April 2013, submitted to the Hon’ble High Court, the owners of the Darbhanga Palace (Respondents 6 to 8) say that they have restored the building “to its original place by reconstruction of demolished area”. That in para 21, they continue to talk of “restoration” of their building and go on to say that the Hon’ble High Court order dated 18.01.2008 (on writ petition of owners 71449 of 2005) permitted respondents to go ahead with “restoration”. That in Para 22, they further say that there was no modiication in the original structure. That if there was no modification in the building and it still retains its original shape, why was there need for VDA to compound the building.

The photographic evidence below taken by the petitioner clearly shows that the old building is G, G+1 and that the new construction is G, G+1, G+2, G+3 and is therefore completely illegal and that the Respondents 6 to 8 have never shown the Hon’ble High Court these perspectives and these photographs of the Darbhanga Palace.