By IANS,
New Delhi : The demolition of a portion of former Pakistani president Pervez Musharraf’s ancestral home, Neharwali Haveli in Old Delhi’s Daryaganj, has stirred a row with the legality of the construction coming under question.
Archaeological experts say that while the building could be a heritage property, currently there is no protective law for such buildings.
“We have been demanding a law that protects any building of any age, which is considered archaeologically, politically or historically important but at present, there is no such law,” Indian National Trust for Art and Cultural Heritage (INTACH) Chairman, Maj. Gen. (Retd) L.K. Gupta said.
Located behind Daryaganj’s famous Golcha cinema, the Haveli, which occupies a large area at the end of the street, is no longer a single structure but a group of different houses as the portions were bought by new owners from time to time and constructed anew.
The central portion, where some of the dilapidated walls of the original structure can still be seen, was demolished earlier this year to make way for a residential project, according to the nearby shopkeepers.
According to the locals, Musharraf’s family left the Haveli in the custody of a Jain family, members of which still live in some portions of the old Haveli. However, they refused to comment on the situation.
“I was completely shocked. I came to know of the demolition only now and I am surprised how someone could demolish the Neharwali Haveli,” local legislator Shoaib Iqbal said.
“The Haveli is a heritage building. The residents or owners of any such property can not demolish or change any sections,” he claimed.
“When the work was initially started, the police came and stopped the construction but the developers had all the relevant paperwork and the construction restarted,” one of the shopkeepers said, on condition of anonymity.
“This (demolished) portion was already in a crumbling state with only a couple of rooms intact,” he added.
The architect of the project, Abdul Wahid, claimed that the project was purely residential. However, he refused to divulge the details of the developers.