Urban redevelopment projects often come at the cost of institutional and cultural heritage. Discuss with reference to the Central Vista project, and suggest a framework for heritage impact assessment.

Urban redevelopment replaces ageing buildings. It harms heritage when the plan treats old institutions as tenants to be cleared rather than assets to be protected. The Central Vista project aims to bring all 51 ministries into 10 Common Central Secretariat (CCS) buildings [1]. It shows both what redevelopment can offer and what it can cost.

Heritage gains the project claims

• One of its guiding principles is the conservation and rejuvenation of cultural and heritage facilities [1].
• North and South Blocks will become a National Museum complex, opening about 80,000 sq m of space to the public [1].

Heritage costs: the Central Vista experience

• Institutional displacement: the 135-year-old Central Secretariat Library, which holds over 8.5 lakh books, was told to vacate within 13 days. Reports say it got no space in the new plan [2].
• A library cannot sit in storage: a ministry keeps working from a new office. A boxed-up library stops serving researchers and officials, even if no book is lost.
• Weak prior scrutiny: in Rajeev Suri v. DDA (2021), the majority upheld the project. Justice Sanjiv Khanna's dissent said Heritage Conservation Committee approval should have come first, and that public participation cannot be a "mechanical exercise or formality" [3].
• The Court stepping in late: the Supreme Court had to take suo motu cognisance of the library's move [2]. This points to a gap in planning.
• Cultural institutions moved: CCS 1 and 2 are being built on the former IGNCA plot [1].

A framework for Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA)

Inventory → Grade significance → Assess impact & alternatives
   → Public hearing → Independent prior clearance → Rehabilitate & monitor

Fig.: Six-step HIA cycle

• Inventory first: list buildings, collections, archives and libraries before any demolition order is issued.
• Prior statutory clearance: get Heritage Conservation Committee approval before work starts [3].
• Equal rehabilitation: every displaced institution should get interim and permanent space, as ministries get CCS space [1].
• Safe handling of collections: catalogue every item, digitise rare volumes, move them in climate-controlled conditions, and set realistic deadlines.
• Real consultation: hear from the people who use these institutions.
• Same legal weight as EIA: the project carried out a detailed Environment Impact Assessment for all works [1]. HIA should be just as mandatory.

Central Vista shows that modernisation and heritage need not clash; the real problem is the order in which decisions are made. A mandatory HIA done before work begins would follow Article 49 and the fundamental duty under Article 51A(f). It would let India build a more efficient capital without losing its institutional memory.