Enter The Neopolis

• Lotus Temple, Delhi
  
• LIC Building, Delhi
  
• Air India Building, Marine Drive, Mumbai
  
• Parliament House
  
• Rashtrapati Bhavan
  
• Vidhana Souda, Bangalore
  
• SBI Building, Bangalore
  
• National Botanical Gardens, Calcutta, Lucknow

But who decides which buildings qualify for the heritage status and which do not? Towards this end, the ministry is in the process of setting up a heritage commission, in consultation with the urban development ministry. The commission will have as its members historians, social scientists, urban planners and architects who will lay down the guidelines for states to follow. Among other things, the commission will also recommend sites and contemporary buildings of cultural importance to UNESCO for recognition. Currently, this is the preserve of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) and the environment ministry. The ministry will also be pushing for a special annual financial allocation for the upkeep of the new heritage buildings.

As with all proposals, this one too has no dearth of sceptics. Among them is the finance ministry, say highly placed sources. As the nodal ministry which holds the purse-strings, it sees the move as eroding the authority of individual states to select buildings and sites of cultural importance. Unlike UNESCO's assessment, which is largely a non-partisan one, an initiative from the Centre is feared to be more a political decision than one motivated by art, architecture and aesthetics. Officials in the culture ministry counter this by saying that the heritage commission will lay down the guidelines, it will be left for the states to follow them and draw up their list of buildings and sites.

But if there are enough detractors for the culture ministry's efforts, many others are batting on its side. Montek Singh Ahluwalia for one. Last month, the deputy chairperson of the Planning Commission shot off a letter to urban development minister Jaipal Reddy strongly advocating a case for new buildings representing the "new resurgent India". Ahluwalia felt that by the 100th anniversary of India's independence in 2047, these constructions must represent a more contemporary India and reflect its booming economy.

This, though, did not stop him from asking for a restructuring of some buildings in the national capital which he felt are "non-descript" buildings. Ahluwalia found one such right where he sits: the Planning Commission office. Shastri Bhavan and Krishi Bhavan, which house government offices, too could do with an urgent makeover. "The buildings need to be revamped to make optimum use of space and design," pleaded Ahluwalia. But beautification of existing buildings is not an immediate priority. Both the culture and urban development ministry would rather concentrate on identifying buildings which need to be preserved.

The government's role will become merely supportive once the commission is set up, a senior culture ministry official is quick to point out. "It will be the members who will decide which buildings make the mark," he says. Also being envisaged is a public-private partnership for the upkeep of the country's heritage, which is already in place at some archaeological sites.

Ministry officials never tire of reminding whoever cares to listen of the importance of setting up a heritage commission. INTACH's A.G.K. Menon welcomes the move. "Right now we are conserving very few buildings and any attempt to protect buildings is welcome," he says. "The significance of heritage lies in the economic, social and cultural context of a country and we need to define what culture means to us. We need to come to terms with how it is transforming." intach has already identified 60,000 buildings/monuments as representative of India's cultural heritage. Close to 1,208 such structures are in Delhi alone. It remains to be seen if the government's list is as exhaustive.

What the officials find significant, though, is that an integrated cultural heritage policy is being envisaged at all—for the first time since independence. Many are seeing the move as an attempt at defining cultural heritage in the Indian context, not leaving it all to UNESCO. As a culture ministry official puts it, "We will be drawing much from UNESCO's experience in this field. But we also hope to have in place a system by which we can identify and maintain buildings which we, as Indians, believe must be preserved."