Dr K S Jawahar Reddy
Chief Secretary
Govt of AP
Dear Dr Jawahar Reddy,
I invite your attention to GORt No. 131 (YAT&C) dated 31-7-2021, in which the State govt had surreptitiously and fraudulently denotified the sacred Thotlakonda Buddhist Archaeological site, originally notified vide GORt No. 627 (Edu) dated 2-5-1978, keeping the people of Vizag and the people of AP in the dark. That such a fraud had been committed by a department headed by a responsible, senior officer of the government, and with the blessings of the political executive, marks a new low in governance. It is unfortunate and highly disappointing.
The Youth Advancement, Tourism and Culture Dept (YAT&C) had issued GORt No 21 dated 12-2-2021 proposing denotification of GORt No 627 of 1978 cited above (compressing the area of Thotlakonda from more than 3,000 acres to 120 acres), calling for objections, if any, from the public, as required in Section 4 of the Andhra Pradesh Ancient and Historical Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1960 (Act VII of 1960) [APAHMASRA].
Several citizens of Visakhapatnam including the undersigned, who are proud of the heritage value of Thotlakonda dating back to the 3rd Century BC, registered their detailed objections, hoping that the YAT&C Dept would diligently apply its mind and revoke GORt No 21.
I have enclosed here a copy of my own correspondence with the YAT&C Dept on the subject. My correspondence covers not only the legal implications of denotifying Thotlakonda but also the details of archaeological evidence obtained from multiple sources.
GORt No 627 of 1978 referred above was issued by the then Education Dept after due deliberation, considering the possibility of a vast stretch of land between the Thotlakonda and Bavikonda hills having highly valuable archaeological evidence.
Accordingly, in the specific case of Thotlakonda, GORt No 627 was issued in 1978 covering the entire area of S. No.314 of Mangamaripeta hamlet of Kapulauppada village in Bheemunipatnam Taluk, stretching over an extent of more than 3,000 acres, though the local Revenue officials, not fully appreciative of the potential value of the land, were content suggesting notification under the Act only to the extent of the area excavated till then. But for the far sightedness of those who headed the Archaeology Dept at that time and the vision displayed by the senior officers and the senior political leaders, such a far reaching government order as GORt No 627, protecting the vast stretch around Thotlakonda, would not have been issued.
Corroborating the vision displayed by the highest in administration and the senior political executive at that time, a research scholar, Lars Fogelin, doing his doctoral research, more than two decades later, conducted surface investigation of the Thotlakonda area around 2000-02, with prior permission from the Archaeology Dept, and found more than 150 Buddhist and other archaeological features all around the Thotlakonda Hill. His Ph D thesis, later published as a book, is available in the public domain. The Archaeology Dept is fully aware of this and are in possession of the artefacts found by Lars Fogelin and formally handed over to the department.
The State Archeology Dept has an outstanding set of archeologists, whose capabilities are comparable to their counterparts anywhere else. It was their relentless excavation work that uncovered many valuable archaeological sites in the north Andhra region, including Thotlakonda. In unravelling the jigsaw puzzle of ancient history, every bit of archaeological evidence is of crucial importance and the evidence excavated by the State Archaeology Dept on the Thotlakonda Hill, coupled with the surface findings made by Lars Fogelin, have such importance. Evidence once obliterated is lost forever.
In recent times, the State committed the mistake of bringing the Archaeology Dept, a highly professional statutory authority, under the administrative control of the YAT&C Dept, as such a step would suppress the voice of the archaeologists in preference to promoting predatory tourism that has the effect of damaging the archaeological assets. This is exactly what has happened in the case of Thotlakonda.
Had the YAT&C Dept officials given a free hand to the Archaeology Dept, it would have been in a position to educate itself of the potential value of the surroundings of Thotlakonda and conserve the same. Unfortunately, it was not to be the case.
There are compelling reasons as to why the area surrounding Thotlakonda Hill should be preserved as it is. I had comprehensively placed all the relevant material before the YAT&C department, advising them not to go ahead with the proposed denotification, as it would amount to obliterating valuable archaeological evidence, which not only constitutes an offence under APAHMASRA, but also under the Treasure Troves Act and the IPC. However, real estate pressure on the political executive, ably supported by the civil servants, appeared to be so much that the YAT&C Dept had chosen to ignore my well considered concerns and go ahead with the notification.
The justification cited by the YAT&C Dept for denotifying the Thotlakonda area, as originally notified in GORt vNo 627, compressing it from more than 3,000 acres to 120 acres, was a trivial and a laughable one, that an error occurred due a “clerical mistake“, committed by the government, drawing its inspiration from an isolated, uninformed report from the local Tehsildar. The justification so simplistically put forward defies any logic, as successive governments since 1978, over a timeframe of more than seven decades, had not thought of any such mistake but the senior officers of the present YAT&C Dept had suddenly chosen to wake up, apparently prompted by their real estate cohorts, to trace that mistake in a contrived manner and compress the area to enable unbridled real estate activity to flourish all around Thotlakonda Hill, destroying the valuable archaeological evidence. That the YAT&C Dept should rush into such an ugly display of open collusion with the real estate developers, without consulting the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), betrays the questionable motives driving the denotification.
The secrecy with which GORt No 131 dated 31-7-2021 was issued is something that has never been on display so far in the administration of the State.
I received a cryptic reply from the YAC&T Dept on 30-7-2021, rejecting all my objections summarily, apparently without any application of mind. On the very next day i.e. 31-7-2021, I replied asking the depat not to issue the denotification in haste, as I would rebut their simplistic and inane arguments with tangible evidence There was no response from the department. On 1-8-2021, I did send a detailed reply to the dept, which failed to get any response whatsoever.
I was never sure of the bona fides of the YAT&C Dept in proposing denotification of the original Thotlakonda GO. I had indeed anticipated that the department would issue the final denotification GO, despite my objections. I was therefore trying to find out from the AP portal whether the dept had issued any such GO.
On 5-8-2021, while scanning the AP Portal for the latest GOs issued, to my surprise, I found an entry, “GORt-131 dated 31-7-2021 ‘confidential’ “, which I suspected to be the final GO of denotification. I therefore mentioned it in my letter of 5-8-2021 addressed to the Special Chief Secretary to YAT&C, asking him to clarify within a day whether that confidential GO, which could not be downloaded at all, was the final GO on Thotlakonda (please see the highlighted portion of my correspondence enclosed here). Afterall, Govt Orders are public documents to which the public is entitled to have access, both under the provisions of the RTI Act and as per the norms applicable to any civilised government. Apparently, the officer concerned thought that he was not bound either by the RTI Act or the norms of good governance, as he chose not to reply to my letter!
Also, a draft notification placed in the public domain, calling for objections from the public, cannot be anything other than a public document. A subsequent notification following from it, as is the case with GORt No 131, should be deemed to be a public document, easily accessible to the public through the AP govt portal. The only inference one could draw from such excessive secrecy about denotifying Thotlakonda was that it was meant to be hidden from the public to benefit some real estate developers.Hiding a GO like this from the public betrays motives of corruption and malfeasance.
This showed that the present government is afraid of functioning transparently and afraid to remain accountable to the public. A government which thinks it can run administration on the basis of hidden GOs is grossly mistaken.
It is unfortunate that senior civil servants and advisors, highly paid at the expense of the people, with fairly secure service conditions, should consider themselves subservient to their political masters, not committed to the law of the land.
I may point out further that, even today (13-12-2022), GORt No 131 remains “confidential”, inaccessible to the public, as perhaps the YAT&C Dept continues to be apprehensive that the citizens of Vizag and the people of the State would question the government doling out valuable lands, especially a heritage land like this one, to its favourite private corporate cohorts. There cannot be anything more despicable than how the YAT&C Dept continues to hide the GO from the public. I am sure that many concerned citizens like me would question the conduct of the government in this matter.
I may point out further that, even today (13-12-2022), GORt No 131 remains “confidential”, inaccessible to the public, as perhaps the YAT&C Dept continues to be apprehensive that the citizens of Vizag and the people of the State would question the government doling out valuable lands, especially a heritage land like this one, to its favourite private corporate cohorts. There cannot be anything more despicable than how the YAT&C Dept continues to hide the GO from the public. I am sure that many concerned citizens like me would question the conduct of the government in this matter.
I find many similar “confidential” GOs listed at the AP portal and I am sure that most of them are a manifestation of open corruption and crony capitalism.
We would not have been able to get hold of a copy of this infamous GO (GORt No 131) but for the fact that this had to be shared by the District Collector of Visakhapatnam in an affidavit filed by him on 12-12-2022 in another case relating to Kapulauppada (WP No.23352//2021). It shows that, however hard the government may try to hide the truth, it will come out one day or the other.
I am not sure whether GORt No 131 amounts to an outright defiance of an interim order passed by Hon’ble AP High Court on 16-10-2020 in PIL No. 224/2020 to maintain status quo in regard to S.No 314 of Kapuluppada Village with special reference to the Buddhist Stupa area. If it is so, it certainly amounts to the government committing contempt of that order.
I find that fraudulent ways and clandestine conduct have become an order of the day with the present government.
Recently, as learnt from numerous news reports, the State authorities had given false and misleading information in an ongoing case before the Hon’ble AP High Court, on the illegal excavations carried out by the State Tourism Department on Rushikonda Hill. The mindless damage caused to the Rushikonda Hill has been a matter of serious concern for the citizens. It is unfortunate that the State should engage highly expensive legal counsel from Delhi to argue its otherwise indefensible case of destroying Rushikonda, all at the expense of the people of the State.
Similarly, the clandestine goings on in the case of the highly valuable Daspalla lands in the heart of the city and the alleged involvement of senior political leaders, apparently with the political executive’s blessings, have raised a serious public concern. The State govt, for reasons best known to it, is afraid of subjecting the Daspalla matter to a CBI investigation, as demanded by some of us.
The non-transparent way in which the State govt had recently sold off its equity share in the strategic Gangavaram Port to the Adani Group, perhaps paving the way for expediting privatisation of the Visakhapatnam Steel Plant, has similarly raised questions about the motives of the political executive. The State govt should know that privatisation of the Visakhapatnam Steel plant raises serious sentimental concerns for the people of north Andhra region.One gets the impression that the present government in the State is openly colluding with the Centre to sell the steel plant for a song to a chosen private corporate.
There are also widespread rumours going round that political party representatives, largely outsiders, have been active in grabbing the lands of the people of Visakhapatnam and its adjacent areas of north Andhra, often from helpless D-Patta landowners, illegally occupying ceiling surplus lands, inam lands, even evicting slum dwellers to take away their lands, illegally occupying other prohibited lands, to the detriment of the interests of the people of Uttarandhra region.
It is high time that the government takes note of the fact that it can at best act as a trustee on behalf of the public in dealing with public lands and any attempt to treat the government as its zamindari would constitute a serious breach of the public trust.
May I request you to move the State Cabinet and get GORt No 131 dated 31-7-2021 revoked forthwith, as it was a fraudulent order issued clandestinely, keeping the public in the dark, only to help undesirable real estate activity, to the detriment of conservation of the archaeological evidence around the Thotlakonda Hill?
The State govt should know that the Thotlakonda Buddhist site and its surroundings have a sentimental value for many Buddhists in this area and elsewhere in the country. By resorting to issuing orders to fragment the Buddhist stretch around Thotlakonda Hill and alienating the same for real estate activity would hurt their sentiments, as such orders affect the sanctity of the area.
I may also express my disappointment at the contrasting approaches of the two Telugu States, AP and Telangana.
The Telangana government has been consciously preserving and promoting the State’s historic, heritage sites and has even succeeded in getting them recognition as world heritage sites by such world bodies as UNESCO. In contrast, the AP government is adopting policies to prefer real estate activity at the cost of conserving sites such as Bavikonda-Thotlakonda stretch, which deserve to be proposed for recognition as world heritage sites. I hope that the people of AP become aware of this!
Regards,
Yours sincerely,
E A S Sarma
Visakhapatnam
13-12-2022