Agiary’s uncertain fate

A pall of uncertainty still shrouds the fate of the 122-year-old Nusserwanjee Ruttonjee Tata Agiary in Bandra. Will the Bombay Municipal Corporation (BMC) demolish a part of the heritage structure or will the Agiary be spared in the revived road widening scheme?

On June 26, 2007 The Times of India (TOI) reported that the "civic administration is making another effort to acquire land for widening parts of Hill Road” and that the Agiary "is in danger of losing its porch and part of its compound yet again… A civic circular says the fire temple is included in the acquisition plan.” It may be recalled that in November 2006 citizens of all religious persuasions had come out onto the street to protest against the imminent demolition of portions of the Agiary and two churches on Hill Road, effectively stalling the BMC’s plan. Parsiana had wondered at that time, for how long ("A temporary reprieve?” December 21, 2006)?

Once again angry citizens have raised the banner of protest, challenging the BMC’s intentions, reported The Indian Express dated June 28, 2007. Taking a strong stand to preserve the Tata Agiary, corporators from all parties came together to make joint municipal commissioner (improvements) V. Radha withdraw the proposal. A new proposal for road widening will now be made, with the consent of Hill Road residents. "The move is extremely positive,” said Shyama Kulkarni, member of the H-West Residents’ Association. "It is always important to take a local view of situations, and we will cooperate with the BMC on the issue.” She had earlier castigated the BMC for going back on its word and suggested to the TOI that the Corporation’s current budget could accommodate the construction of a skywalk in the area, eliminating altogether the need for widening the road.

As of now the threat has subsided. But there are no written guarantees that further attempts will not be made in future. In fact activist Phiroze Amroliwalla, in a letter to an evening tabloid, has asked whether the BMC is following a ‘divide and rule’ policy because this time it tried to "acquire land only of the agiary, perhaps hoping to manage the lesser resistance from the peace-loving Parsi community.”