Dispute among Gandhian organisations over Sabarmati Ashram redevelopment plan

The plan is to expand the existing Sabarmati Ashram over 55 acres of land

In what seems to be an emergent dispute among the Gandhian organisations over the Rs 1,200 crore redevelopment of the Mahatma Gandhi-founded Sabarmati Ashram, the associated trusts have opposed involving New Delhi-based Gandhi Smarak Nidhi (GSN), an umbrella of Gandhian organisations, in the project as suggested by Gandhi's great-grandson, Tushar Gandhi.

Two key trusts, while siding with the state government's plan, have categorically said that GSN has "no authority over Gandhi Ashram directly or indirectly." GSN is the same organisation, which back in 1950s and 1960s "financially and morally" helped these trusts. These trusts include Sabarmati Ashram Preservation and Memorial Trust (SAPMT), which manages the popular Sabarmati Ashram and Harijan Ashram Trust, among others. There are four other trusts associated with the Ashram.

The properties of all these six trusts, which have been functioning independently since their existence, are being merged as part of a bigger ashram in the redevelopment plan. The plan is to expand the existing Sabarmati Ashram, where tourists flock to, over 55 acres of land and amalgamate the separate trusts and their properties which were once part of the greater ashram.

The project has identified over 40 "congruent" buildings which will be preserved and rest of them, roughly 200 in number, will be demolished. The demolition work has already started. The plan promises to provide international standard facilities for tourists: a cafeteria, a parking lot, parks, revival of Chandrabhaga river stream, and closure of the road that divides Ashram properties to make it a silent zone have been planned, among other improvements.

Gandhian organisations and 140 prominent personalities have opposed the project claiming that it "severely compromises and trivializes the sanctity and importance of the present-day Ashram, mainly Hriday Kunj, surrounding buildings, and the museum." However, the project has been approved by all the trusts. The state government has also formed a separate trust, the Mahatma Gandhi Sabarmati Ashram Memorial Trust, for the project which has raised concerns about the autonomy of the existing trusts. There are also concerns over who will have the authority of governance when the project gets completed.

Amidst these concerns, Tushar Gandhi filed a public interest litigation (PIL) challenging the redevelopment plan, claiming that it is "diametrically opposed to the personal wishes and bequeathal of Mahatma Gandhi and would reduce the shrine and memorial of our freedom movement which attracts national and international visitors and turn the same into a commercial tourist attraction." The petition also mentioned that if any redevelopment work was needed, it should be carried out only by the trusts running the ashram and GSN, while the government may fund it.

The state government has opposed the PIL and has told the high court that GSN doesn't have "any superintendence over the Gandhi Ashram or over any other trusts associated with the Gandhi Ashram." Subsequently, after the high court asked associated trusts to respond, SAPMT and Sabarmati Harijan Ashram Trust (SHAT) filed affidavits in which they endorsed the state government's plan. Both the key trusts have stated that GSN has no such authority over their trusts while SHAT has stated that "there is no question of involving the respondent no-2 (GSN) in the development of proposed project."

Response of Sabarmati Ashram Preservation and Memorial Trust (SAPMT)

While telling the high court that the SAPMT "in-principle favours the proposed project of Gandhi Ashram Memorial and Precinct Development," its director, Atul Pandya, has said in the affidavit, "While the Respondent No.2 was formed as an umbrella organisation, it neither had nor has any legal right of any nature whatsoever over the Gandhi Ashram and precincts....Respondent No.2 doesn't play any role whatsoever in the management and affairs of the Gandhi Ashram and precincts."

Admitting that it received funds from GSN, the affidavit reads, "Only till 1959, various recurring and non-recurring expenditures of the SAPMT were met by the Respondent No.2, but thereafter the SAPMT has been financially independent...No development, restoration or conservation activity of the Gandhi Ashram subsequent to this period has involved Respondent No.2 in any way." The affidavit was filed recently in the court where the PIL is pending.

Claiming that "independence of the trusts, including the SAPMT, has been and will be maintained," Pandya has said that "MGSAMT has been formed only for enhanced coordination and consultation between the trusts...The role of the MGSAMT is to provide comprehensive infrastructure and expert guidance." It also said that the existing trusts which own and manage the Gandhi Ashram and precinct "will have adequate representation in the governing council of MGSAMT."

Response of Sabarmati Harijan Ashram Trust (SHAT)

Stating that it has also given "in principle" approval for the redevelopment project, SHAT said in the affidavit, "The trusts which presently owns and manages (sic) the Gandhi Ashram is required to have adequate representation in the governing council of MGSAMT (the newly formed trust by state government)." This trust also said that GSN has "no authority over the Gandhi Ashram either directly or indirectly, and thus there is no question of involving the respondent no.2 (GSN) in the development of proposed project."

"I say and submit that the respondent no.2 after development of Ashram had lost their interest with the passage of time in the constructive work activities of SHAT," reads the affidavit filed by Madhukar Dhruva, trustee of SHAT. This trust owns land measuring 87,889 square metres which is a substantial portion of the proposed project. The trust has listed ownership of 38 buildings comprising 26 historical buildings (constructed before 1940) and many others which came later. However, it doesn't mention Manav Sadhna, an NGO run by Jayesh Patel, one of the trustees and who also happens to be son-in-law of former chief minister of Gujarat, Anandi Patel.

Response of Gandhi Smarak Nidhi (GSN)

GSN was formed after the assassination of Gandhi to collect funds to set up memorials at places where Gandhi had stayed. Harijan Ashram, as the present Sabarmati Ashram was known back then, was chosen as one of them. In its affidavit, GSN has said that Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, G V Mavalankar, industrialists and philanthropists Seth Kasturbhai Lalbhai, Seth Amritlal Hargovinddas and others took initiative to raise funds and deposited the same with GSN. GSN handed over a sum of Rs 23.20 lakh to the trustees of SAPMT in 1948. The affidavit stated that till 1959 GSN provided financial support for administrative costs to SAPMT. Meanwhile, the Harijan Sevak Sangh was given a total of Rs 2.40 crore until 1970.

The affidavit filed by Sanjoy Singha, secretary of GSN, has said that in the name of redevelopment the ashram shouldn't be converted to a "mere tourist place." The affidavit states that it agrees with the intent of the state government's plan but wants the "content and design" of the project to be proposed by a committee of Gandhian scholars, Sarvodaya leaders, heritage experts, and government officials. It has suggested that the government should assure the court that after completion of the project, the "same would be handed over to individual trusts and that the respondent no.1 (state) has no intention to take over Gandhi Ashram and its precincts."

"There is a genuine apprehension and possibility that MGSAMT may take over the rights and autonomy of individual trusts. Therefore, either the respondent no.1 can consider altogether withdrawing the newly established trust i.e., MGSAMT or to give an undertaking that the role of MGSAMT is only limited to coordination and provision of infrastructure," the affidavit stated.