Wrecking ball

The ministry of environment and forests,in an order put up on its website on Sunday,ordered the demolition of the building run by the Adarsh Cooperative Housing Society,and the restoration of the site to its “original condition”. There are many reasons given for this decision: among them,ironically,is the concern that a government takeover would increase its “discretionary powers”. While,in many ways,the culture of regularisation has been problematic,it’s nevertheless true that in this instance government action will cause more questions to be asked than answered.

Here’s one: how did it come up in the first place? Thirty-one stories in the heart of Colaba,with the connivance,apparently,of every conceivable agency,from the local urban development agencies to the environment ministry itself. This order does not address that — but it penalises those that took those regulatory orders at face value. And now,what happens to due process? Demolition,obviously,is not a reversible act. Adarsh was put up following a tangle of permissions,notices and certifications,some of which were contingent on others,and unravelling which is not an instantaneous process. Nevertheless,the ministry expects the building down in three months. Yet,in a civilised society,there is the right to appeal arbitrariness. Or is that precisely why the order has been put out — because it’s known it will not be enforced,since due process hasn’t been carried out? That last would be a very cynical subversion of how regulation is supposed to operate.

But,then again,this is precisely how regulation is not supposed to operate. Regulation is not supposed to be about making convenient,headline-ready examples,but about the painstaking work of examining and clearing projects. A fast-growing country needs a depoliticised authority that impartially administers the regulations decided on by duly elected policy-makers. Instead,what we seem to have got under UPA 2 is a system where short-cuts are taken by everyone — and then,when politically convenient,some of the offenders are hung out to dry to appease public anger. Nor can a single ministry think itself in hermetic isolation and order the demolition of a building the residents of which are pleading in court that they have the permissions they need. That is not how a mature regulator is run. And having a Delhi Bhavan order an arbitrary demolition of a building it doesn’t approve of is painfully reminiscent of licence-raj days. And this order,taking down one building among dozens,meets the definition of arbitrary — based on random choice or personal whim.