Tag: NMML

Nehru’s Name Dropped From Nehru Memorial Museum and Library Society

A PIB press release said Union defence minister Rajnath Singh, who is also the Society’s vice-president, welcomed its new name, as ‘in its new form, the institution exhibits the contributions of all prime ministers from Shri Jawaharlal Nehru to Shri Narendra Modi.’

New Delhi: The Nehru Memorial Museum and Library (NMML) Society, the body that manages the eponymous complex, has renamed itself the ‘Prime Ministers’ Museum and Library Society’, the Press Information Bureau (PIB) announced on Friday, June 16.

Although PIB’s release only mentions the ‘society’ and does not note if the museum itself will be renamed, The Hindu and Indian Express have reported that the NMML will now be called the Prime Ministers’ Museum and Library Society.

Union defence minister Rajnath Singh, who is also the Society’s vice-president, welcomed its new name, as “in its new form, the institution exhibits the contributions of all prime ministers from Shri Jawaharlal Nehru to Shri Narendra Modi”, PIB’s press release read.

Singh was referring to the addition in April 2022 of a separate building dedicated to prime ministers after Jawaharlal Nehru next to the NMML.

“The Executive Council subsequently felt that the name of the institution should reflect the present activities, which now also include a Sangrahalaya depicting the collective journey of democracy in independent India and highlighting the contribution of each prime minister in nation-building,” PIB’s press release also said.

The Nehru museum and the new building are together known as the Pradhanmantri Sangrahalaya – Hindi for ‘prime ministers’ museum’.

The new building that was inaugurated in April 2022. Photo: Anirudh S.K./The Wire.

In late 2019, the Union government removed three Congress leaders from the Society who had opposed the new building’s construction. The NMML was also involved in a controversy in 2015 when its then-director Mahesh Rangarajan quit over political pressures.

While the new building is just over a year old, the older building that houses the Nehru museum was built in 1930 as Flagstaff House to serve as the residence of British India’s commander-in-chief. 

Nehru moved into this building shortly after becoming prime minister in 1947 and it was renamed ‘Teen Murti Bhavan’ (Hindi for ‘three statues house’). It was converted into a museum dedicated to his memory in 1964.

Meat Struck off Harappan Menu at Exhibit, National Museum Denies ‘Interference’

Additional director general Subrata Nath said that the “policy” of not serving non-vegetarian dishes was not a written one, but a “sentimental one”.

New Delhi: The National Museum has barred “meat dishes” from being served at the ongoing ‘Historical Gastronomica – The Indus Dinning Experience‘, which kickstarted on Wednesday here.

With the objective of showcasing dishes and the history behind them, as well as other culinary related archaeological finds from the the 5,000-year-old Indus Valley Civilisation, the event included both vegetarian and non vegetarian dishes till Tuesday when the museum said that no meat would be served.

The event is being jointly organised by the National Museum, the Ministry of Culture and private firm One Station Million Stories (OSMS). The last minute-decision, citing “unspecified rules” was intimated to OSMS by the museum on Wednesday.

Unidentified officials in the Ministry of Culture said that “a couple of MPs” reacted to the menu shared by the ministry online, the Indian Express reported.

Also read: ‘No Meat, No Coronavirus’ Makes No Sense

The newspaper reported that additional director general Subrata Nath has also denied knowledge of any “external interference” in the matter. Nath reportedly said, “Actually, there is no rule as such. But we have to respect the museum’s tradition. So we emailed the private organisers yesterday.”

Nath told PTI that OSMS did not discuss in detail the non-vegetarian part of the menu with the museum officials. “They (OSMS) got our approval but the non-vegetarian part of the menu was not discussed with us. We assumed that they would know that we do not serve non-vegetarian food here given the policy of the institution. Just ten days back, we had a Guru Nanak festival and we never had this controversy,” Nath said.

He added that the “policy” of not serving non-vegetarian dishes was not a written one, but a “sentimental one”.

The event, which is being held on the museum lawn from February 19 to 25, includes tasting menus through the day, and dinners that have to be pre-booked.

The programme schedule

The dishes that are no longer available include fish in turmeric stew, quail/fowl/country chicken roasted in Saal leaf, offal’s pot, bati with dry fish, meat fat soup, lamb liver with chick-pea, dried fish and Mahua oil chutney.

When asked if this was straying from the culinary history of ancient India where non-vegetarian dishes were common, Nath said that visitors will just not be served the food, but will be briefed on them.

“We are not serving the non-vegetarian food, but we will brief visitors on the historical dietary practises of ancient India, so it is wrong to say that we are not giving a true picture of the food in ancient times,” he said.

A part of the menu from the promotions ahead of the exhibition.

In 2002, the National Museum had hit headlines over food politics when Hindu fundamentalist group Vishwa Hindu Parishad burnt an effigy of the museum director’s in protest when the canteen decided to start serving meat dishes.

According to The Print, in 1990, it was alcohol that landed then museum director L.P. Sihare in a tough spot when he was fired after serving drinks at an event to a visiting Western delegation.

(With inputs from PTI)

With Modi’s Former Principal Secretary as Chair of NMML, BJP Control is Absolute

Prasar Bharati chairman A. Surya Prakash was appointed as the vice chairman of the eight-member executive council, which is the highest decision-making body of the institution.

New Delhi: Former principal secretary to Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Nripendra Mishra, has been appointed chairman of the Nehru Memorial Museum and Library, according to a report in the Economic Times.

Mishra, who resigned as the principal secretary to the PM last year, is former a UP cadre IAS officer and has been closely associated with the think tank Vivekananda International Foundation. As chairman of the NMML, Mishra replaces Lokesh Chandra, the former president of Indian Council for Cultural Relations.

Prasar Bharati chairman A. Surya Prakash has been appointed the vice chairman of NMML’s eight-member executive council, which is the highest decision-making body of the institution.

Prakash replaced M.J. Akbar, former Union minister of state for external affairs, who resigned from the government in 2018 after multiple allegations of sexual harassment were levelled against him. After his resignation, Akbar no longer held any official position at the NMML.

Other members of the executive council include Indian Council for Cultural Relations chairman Vinay Sahasrabuddhe, who is from the RSS, chairperson of the Indian Institute of Advanced Study Kapil Kapoor and the pro-BJP nominated Rajya Sabha member Swapan Dasgupta. The three members of the EC are already part of the NMML society.

The executive council comprises five nominated members and three officials from the ministry of culture and meets five to six times a year.

Also read: NMML Head Quits, First Casualty of ‘Culture Wars’ Between BJP, Congress

According to an order issued in November last year, Prime Minister Narendra Modi is the president of the NMML Society and Defence Minister Rajnath Singh its vice president.

In November last year, the Centre removed Congress leaders Mallikarjun Kharge, Jairam Ramesh and Karan Singh from the NMML society and inducted the following members: Union home minister Amit Shah,  Union ministers Nirmala Sitharaman, Ramesh Pokhriyal, Prakash Javadekar, V. Muraleedharan and Prahlad Singh Patel, TV journalist Rajat Sharma,  Censor board chief Prasoon Joshi,  Anirban Ganguly of the BJP-run Syama Prasad Research Mookerjee Foundation,  Indira Gandhi National Centre of Arts member secretary Sachchidanand Joshi, who is from the RSS, Indira Gandhi National Centre of Arts chief Ram Bahadur Rai, who is from the RSS, Gujarat-based writer Kishore Makwana, author of two books: Commonman Narendra Modi (2014) and Modi: Common Man’s PM (2015), Academic Kamlesh Joshipura who was president of the BJP unit in Rajkot, Gujarat; Ahmedabad-based historian Rizwan Kadri; and academic Makarand Paranjpe.

The committee was also cut down from 34 members to 28.. Barring Paranjpe, all members are from the RSS/BJP or are from Gujarat, or both.

The decision to reconstitute the EC comes at a time when the government plans to overhaul the museum and lay emphasis on a new “Museum for all PMs,” a project that the Congress has claimed undermines the legacy of Jawaharlal Nehru.

According to the report in ET, the concept and design for the new museum will likely be finalised on Monday, which is likely to be attended by a select group of the members of the NMML society.

With Mishra’s appointment, the reconstitution of both the NMML society as well as the NMML executive council, which takes important decisions pertaining to the museum associated with India’s first prime minister, is now complete and represents the exertion of total control over the organisation by the RSS and BJP.

The latest’s announcement prompted the senior journalist Vidya Subrahmaniam to note:

(With inputs from PTI)

Nehru Memorial Society Gets Shah, Rajnath as Members; Three Congress Leaders Dropped

New faces on the panel include author of book on Modi, while Arnab Goswami moves out within a year of induction.

New Delhi: All the Congress leaders who were members of the Nehru Memorial Museum and Library (NMML) Society and last year objected to the coming up of a new ‘Museum for Prime Ministers’, saying it sought to “obliterate Jawaharlal Nehru”, have been dropped from the reconstituted body.

In the absence of Jairam Ramesh, Karan Singh and Mallikarjun Kharge, the society will now don a rather saffron look with senior government functionaries like Prime Minister Narendra Modi, defence minister Rajnath Singh and home minister Amit Shah at the helm.

The NMML board has been reconstituted nearly six months before its term was to expire. The new members would have a term of five years. While the society is chaired by the prime minister, the induction of Singh and Shah is notable as both are first-time entrants.

Incidentally, last year, the Centre had inducted four new members into the society. The new members had replaced eminent personalities like academic Pratap Bhanu Mehta and economist Nitin Desai, who had strongly opposed the Centre’s move to set up a Museum for Prime Ministers within the Teen Murti premises.

Nehru Memorial Museum and Library. Credit: Wikimedia Commons

Arnab Goswami dropped within a year of induction

Among those inducted then were television journalist and co-founder of Republic TV Arnab Goswami; former journalist and author Ram Bahadur Rai, who was in 2016 also appointed by the Modi government to head the 20-member board of the Indira Gandhi National Centre for Arts; career diplomat and former foreign secretary of India, S. Jaishankar, who has now become the minister for external affairs; and BJP national vice-president and Rajya Sabha MP Vinay Sahasrabuddhe, who headed party’s think tank, Public Policy Research Centre.

This time around, the Centre has trimmed the total strength of the society from 34 to 28.

Several of the big names of the last society are absent this time, including Goswami, who was dropped even before he completed a year. Other members who have been dropped include former minister M.J. Akbar, who quit his post following allegations of sexual harassment; former army chief V.P. Mali; Infosys co-founder N.R. Narayanamurthy; historian Nayanjot Lahiri; economist Bibek Debroy; and space scientist K. Kasturirangan.

Also Read: Prime Ministers’ Museum Is Coming up in Nehru’s Backyard, but He Won’t Be in It

A number of other union ministers have also been inducted. They include finance minister Nirmala Sitharaman, HRD minister Ramesh Pokhriyal, information and broadcasting minister Prakash Javadekar, minister of state for external affairs V. Muraleedharan, and culture minister Prahlad Patel.

As earlier, a number of people who have been close to the current dispensation have been awarded the membership. The new inductees include two well-known personalities – senior journalist and founder of India TV Rajat Sharma; adman, lyricist and chairperson of Central Board of Film Certification Prasoon Joshi; and journalist-turned-politician Swapan Dasgupta.

Author of book on Modi made member

Another notable presence in the society will be writer Kishore Makwana from Gujarat. He had authored the book Modi: Common Man’s PM in 2015.

Others who have been made members are policy researcher Anirban Ganguly, academics Kapil Kapoor and Kamlesh Joshipura, and researcher Rizwan Kadri. Member secretary of the Indira Gandhi National Centre of the Arts, Sachidannand Joshi, will be part of the society due to his position in IGNCA.

Apart from this, chairman of the Indian Council of Cultural Relations, Sahasrabudhe again finds a place in the society along with the president of IGNCA Ram Bahadur Rai; Prasar Bharti chairman A. Surya Prakash and chairman of NMML’s executive council Lokesh Chandra.

The Ministry of Culture’s secretary Raghvendra Singh, who replaced former private secretary to Atal Bihari Vajpayee, Shakti Sinha, as director of NMML this October, will continue to be in the society. And so too would secretaries of the department of expenditure in the ministries of finance and urban development ministry.

Congress will have only token presence

While the government has filled the society with a large number of ministers and bureaucrats, the Congress now retains only a token say as a representative of the Jawaharlal Nehru Memorial Fund will still find a place as an ex-officio member. The decision on who would represent the fund would be taken by party president Sonia Gandhi.

MEA Doesn’t Want 1947-49 Kashmir Files of Then Indian Army Chief to Be Public

Archival materials also prove that Jawaharlal Nehru considered invading Pakistan in 1947 over Kashmir.

The process of manufacturing post facto approval for the momentous changes that the Central government made to the status of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) in August 2019, with parliament’s nod, is in full swing.

Apart from the chest-thumping at the recent election rallies in Maharashtra and Haryana, and the latest round of military operations launched across the northwestern border, educational institutions are being pressed to organise debates on this issue.

A common theme that pervades all these attempts to legitimise recent actions over J&K is the blame game targetting other political parties that governed the Centre and J&K for all that went wrong until August 2019. Arguably, the favourite whipping boy of critics of the Kashmir policy is Jawaharlal Nehru, who was the prime minister at the time of J&K’s accession to the Indian Union in October, 1947.

An oft-repeated charge against Nehru was that he did not show enough courage to beat back the invaders who descended on J&K in September 1947. Instead, he is accused of internationalising the matter by making a complaint to the United Nations at the end of December that year. So the picture fabricated for public consumption is one of contrast between the “weakness” of a “vacillating” leader in 1947 and the “aggressiveness” of his “decisive” successor in the 21st century. This is what current and successive generations are expected to lap up as the gospel truth about J&K affairs between 1947-48, as compared to the developments in the 21st century.  

Also read: In Congressional Hearing, US Lawmakers Critical of India’s Actions in Kashmir

Unfortunately, in the 15th year of the implementation of The Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act), crucial official papers that would help the citizenry, particularly millennials and their successors of Generation Z, and of course academia, to understand the Kashmir issue better, are being withheld on government orders.

The Nehru Memorial Museum and Library, popularly known as Teen Murti Library, under instructions from the Ministry of External Affairs, has denied me access to the files about J&K put together between 1947-49 by India’s second Army chief, Sir Roy Bucher.

The background

Readers might remember my piece published in The Wire in 2016 around the 68th anniversary of J&K’s accession to the Indian Union ( 26-27 October). I had published multi-colour scanned copies of the Instrument of Accession signed by the then Ruler of J&K, Maharaja Hari Singh and accepted by the then British Vice Roy in India, Lord Louis Mountbatten of Burma in 1947. The Wire resurrected that piece in the aftermath of the legislative exercise made in August 2019 to change J&K’s status in the Indian constitution.

In the interim, my ‘Quest for Transparency’ (a phrase borrowed from the website of the Prime Minister’s Office) continued, until it led me to a 20-odd-page transcript of an interview of Sir Francis Robert Roy Bucher, second commander-in-chief of the Indian Army (who took over from General Sir McGregor MacDonald Lockhart) conducted by noted biographer B.R. Nanda a few decades after the former’s retirement in October 1949.

The transcript of the interview with Bucher makes for very interesting reading, with tidbits about what happened in J&K narrated from memory and also his love for India and the respect he had for top leaders like Nehru, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel and Sir C. Rajagopalachari, the first governor general of independent India. This crucial interview contains multiple references to files and papers related to J&K affairs that were compiled between 1947 and October 1949 by Bucher and handed over to NMML.

Also read: To Be Indian in These Times Is to Battle a Crisis of Faith

When I looked up its index of archival papers, this file that Bucher had handed over to NMML was catalogued “closed”. Surprised that NMML would be holding back government records and papers from public scrutiny even after more than 70 years had lapsed, I inquired with some of the senior officials about this practice. One conceded that certain archival material is indeed withheld from scholars and researchers on two grounds:

  1. under instructions from the government department concerned; and
  2. under instructions from the donor or his/her family who hand over archival materials to NMML.

The RTI intervention  

So at the beginning of this month (October 2019), I submitted a request under the RTI Act to NMML, through the RTI Online Facility, seeking the following information:

“1) A clear photocopy of any list of records, documents, papers, microfilms, microfiche and any other material available in the holdings of the Nehru Memorial Museum and Library that are closed to the public, under instructions from any agency in or under the Government of India;

2) A clear photocopy of any list of records, documents, papers, microfilms, microfiche and any other material available in the holdings of the Nehru Memorial Museum and Library that are closed to the public, under instructions from any agency in or under the State or Union Territory Governments;

3) The name of the agency which has issued instructions, the date of such instruction and the period for which every such record, document, paper, microfilm, microfiche or other materials referred to at para nos. 1 and 2 above, must remain closed to the public, and

4) Inspection for a period of 5 hours, the files and papers pertaining to Jammu and Kashmir handed over to the Nehru Memorial Museum and Library by General Sir Roy Bucher, 2nd Chief of the Army Staff of India, as mentioned in his interview with eminent historian Shri B. R. Nanda, which is recorded in the Sir Roy Bucher Transcripts available in your holdings.

Kindly make arrangements for supplying copies of all papers and micro-films or micro-fiche, if any, or any other materials that I may identify during the inspection.”

Also read: Authorities Refuse to Reveal Details of People From J&K Detained in UP Jails Under RTI

The PIO’s reply

The public information officer (PIO) was prompt enough to send a reply, free of charge, within 20 days of receiving the RTI application. He attached a list of archival papers that are closed for public scrutiny under orders from the Central government or under directions from the donor. A study of the list of “closed papers” attached to the PIO’s reply reveals the following interesting facts:

  1. Sir Roy Bucher’s papers (except for the transcript of the interview with B.R. Nanda) are closed under orders from the Union Ministry of External Affairs;
  2. Certain papers of Pyarelal, who was personal secretary to Mahatma Gandhi in his later years, and Sushila Nayyar, who was Gandhiji’s personal physician, are closed from public scrutiny under directions from Harsh Nayar. This restriction is to run for a period of 30 years. The start date of the embargo is not revealed in the RTI reply;
  3. Certain papers relating to former Prime Minister Indira Gandhi are closed under instructions from the Indira Gandhi Memorial Trust;
  4. Certain papers of Uma Shankar Dixit, former Union minister and governor of my home state, Karnataka during the 1970s (he was removed within a year and a half of appointment when the Janata government came to power in 1977) under instructions from his daughter-in-law Sheila Dixit, former chief minister of Delhi, who also passed away recently. Whether her heirs will continue to press for this secrecy remains to be seen;
  5. Certain papers of K. Hanumanthaiah, former chief minister of my home state Karnataka, (he was instrumental in completing the construction of Vidhana Soudha which houses the State Legislature and certain segments of the Government Secretariat) under instructions from one V. Shivalingam; and
  6. Certain papers donated by noted author Nayantara Sahgal who has instructed maintenance of secrecy until 2033. Incidentally, Sahgal is the niece of Nehru and the daughter of his sister Vijayalakshmi Pandit, who was India’s ambassador to the United Nations and the first woman president of the UN General Assembly in 1953.

The list that NMML’s PIO provided also includes papers of Gordon B. Halstead, who was associated with Gandhiji until the British government ordered him out in 1932 and those belonging to a former officer of the Indian Police Service, Ashwini Kumar. The PIO of NMML endorsed the note prepared by one Priyamvada, staffer of NMML, that Sir Roy Bucher’s papers and the rest listed above cannot be permitted for anybody to see or consult. Click here for the RTI application and reply.

What is problematic about the PIO’s reply

While there might be a justification for keeping personal papers of public figures donated to the NMML away from public scrutiny for a limited period or even eternally, every claim of secrecy for papers relating to official matters of the Central or state government must be tested on the touchstone of the RTI Act. Mere executive instructions issued by a babu are not adequate to prevent access to such records under the RTI Act.

Section 7(1) of the RTI Act clearly states that a request for information made under this law can be refused only on the basis of the exemptions listed under Sections 8 and 9. No other reason is valid. NMML is a public authority and its policies of allowing or refusing access to records relating to governmental affairs must be based on the standards and procedures of the RTI Act.

Also read: The Failing Art of Selling Normalcy in Kashmir

Refusal to provide access to Bucher’s papers related to J&K and other records relating to government affairs must be justified under the exemptions provided in the RTI Act, subject to the public interest override in Section 8(2) of the Act. This is the implication of the overriding effect that Section 22 gives the RTI Act over all other laws, rules, regulations or instruments that have the effect of a law.

MEA’s instructions alone, for maintaining confidentiality of these papers, cannot insulate Bucher’s J&K papers from public scrutiny. I will do the usual appeals in this case and report the developments to you in due course.

Nehru contemplated a strike on Pakistan to save J&K in 1947-48

Many writers and his bitterest critics have accused Nehru of not going the whole length of the way to take back the territory of J&K that had been seized by invaders with active support from across the border, in 1947, after it acceded to independent India soon after Dusshehra and Eid. Bucher seems to know otherwise. In his interview with B.R. Nanda, he remembers the tumultuous events as follows:

“…What went on within the Indian cabinet I do not know, but I have two letters at home [no I think they may even be in the file here (i.e. at NMML); anyway I have copies of them at home if they are not in the file] from Pandit Nehru; he had become very perturbed about the shelling of Akhnur and the Beripattan Bridge by Pakistan heavy artillery from just within Pakistan; he enjoined me to do all I could to counteract this. There was nothing which one could do except counter-shell.

In one his letters Panditji wrote: “I do not know what the United Nations” – I am quoting – “are going to propose. They may propose a ceasefire and what the conditions are going to be I do not know. If there isn’t going to be a cease-fire, then it seems to me that we may be faced with an advance into Pakistan and for that we must be prepared.” I assured my prime minister that all steps would be taken to meet any eventuality” (emphasis supplied).

Bucher continues the narrative saying a few days later then defence minister Sardar Baldev Singh telephoned him to announce a ceasefire. Bucher says he drafted the communication to his counterpart in Pakistan, General Gracey, about the ceasefire, showed it to Nehru in the Lok Sabha and signalled it to Pakistan to stop the hostilities. The justification for the ceasefire was made as follows:

“My Government (Indian Govt.) is of the opinion that senseless moves and counter-moves with loss of life and everything else were achieving nothing in Kashmir; that I (Sir Roy Bucher) had my Government’s authority to order Indian troops to cease firing as from a minute or so before midnight of 31st December…”

The transcript wrongly mentions 1948 as the year in which the ceasefire was signalled. In fact this action was taken at the stroke of midnight when the calendar changed from 1947 to 1948. Sadly, NMML does not permit copying of more than 20% of these old transcripts. So I had to pick and choose from the 20-odd page long document, extracts that serve the purpose of this article. Click here for extracts from the transcript of Bucher’s interview with Nanda.

In order to get to the bottom of the truth, the Sir Roy Bucher files and all other related papers, transcripts and microfilms in the NMML holdings as well as archival materials held in the National Archives (from where I obtained a scanned copy of J&K’s Instrument of Accession) and the MHA and MEA must be made public without any delay.

Also read: The Siege in Kashmir Is Damaging India’s Image Abroad

Very few members of the generation that witnessed the developments in J&K in 1947 are still with us today and their narratives of the developments that led to J&K’s accession to India are at variance with each other on some crucial issues. Transparency of contemporary official records is indispensable to counter propagandist versions of contemporary history.

The NDA-II government promised to declassify papers held in secret for several decades about Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose. It is yet to fully deliver on this commitment. Whether NDA-III will go the whole length of the way to make archival papers about J&K public remains to be seen.

I must also clarify, I hold no brief for any individual. It is important to unearth facts and details from locked-up files and papers to reconstruct a truer picture of what happened in government circles in 1947-48. I hope the RTI Act will prove a useful tool to bring in greater transparency about that sanguinary episode of modern Indian history, if the government does not volunteer to open up these papers for public scrutiny.

Venkatesh Nayak is programme head of the Access to Information Programme of the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative.

Prime Ministers’ Museum Is Coming up in Nehru’s Backyard, but He Won’t Be in It

State-of-the-art museum to focus on the lives and works of 14 other prime ministers, including Modi. It will also accommodate future PMs.

New Delhi: For 16 years, till his death, India’s first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru resided in the Teen Murti Bhavan. But now, when a Museum of Prime Ministers of India is coming up in this very complex, now known as the Nehru Memorial Museum and Library (NMML), he will have to sit it out. The Narendra Modi government will not be giving any place to Nehru in the new state-of-the-art museum, which plans to provide glimpses into the life and work of all other premiers, including Modi.

Only last week, at the launch of a book on former Prime Minister Chandrashekhar, Modi spoke about giving due recognition to all former PMs through the museum. He claimed that it was due to a “coterie of people” that adverse images were created of these leaders in the minds of the people. Incidentally, during his speech, Modi referred to all the PMs except Nehru.

But then, Modi’s dislike for Nehru is well known. Be it while referring to him as part of the Nehru-Gandhi legacy or as an individual, Modi has never missed an opportunity to attack one of India’s most loved figures.

Modi believes that Nehru, and his descendants, are to be blamed for India’s perceived lack of development. In 2013, while addressing an election rally in Chhattisgarh, he said: “The Shehzada (Rahul Gandhi) had come here and was talking about changing the system. In the first place, he should know that the system was made by his father (Rajiv Gandhi), his grand-mother (Indira Gandhi) and great grand-father (Jawaharlal Nehru) for 60 years during their rule. It is they who made the system. It is they who distorted it and misused it for their personal gains.”

He continued this tirade even after his election as prime minister in 2014.

In November 2017, ahead of the Gujarat elections, Modi claimed that Nehru was not happy with the idea of reconstructing the Somnath Temple, even though it happened under his regime in 1950-51. He projected Sardar Patel as the leader who gave shape to the idea, though Patel passed away before work on the temple was completed.

Also Read: Museum for PMs at Teen Murti Seen as Attempt by Modi Regime to ‘Obliterate’ Nehru

Then in 2018, in another veiled attack on Nehru, Modi accused him of doing the bidding of the British. Speaking at an event to commemorate the 75th anniversary of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose’s Azad Hind government at the historic Red Fort, Modi said: “This is our misfortune that after Independence, the architects of Indian systems saw India through the prisms of England. Our culture, our education, our system had faced a lot of problem because of this approach.”

More recently, in May this year, he faulted Nehru for his approach on Kashmir. Modi said: “The Congress wants to keep the fire Pandit Nehru stoked in Kashmir, for which the country is still paying heavy price. It has kept quiet when its ally National Conference said there should be a separate Prime Minister for Kashmir. How can India have two Prime Ministers?”

Jawaharlal Nehru. Credit: DrParameshwara/Twitter

Experts, Congress have slammed Modi’s approach

Many experts have questioned Modi’s attempt to erase Nehru from public memory. They say in the absence of his leadership, India may not have been as powerful and prosperous as it is today.

In July last year, several Congress leaders had objected to the proposal to construct the museum on the premises of the NMML, calling the move “diabolical” and “intended only to obliterate Jawaharlal Nehru”. Incidentally, the move to set up the Museum of Prime Ministers had gained traction after Mahesh Rangarajan, who was appointed by the UPA government, resigned in 2015 and retired IAS officer Shakti Sinha, who had served in the PMO under Atal Bihari Vajpayee, took his place. Sinha had also served as the director of the India Foundation, a think-tank aligned to the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh.

Museum coming up at site of many recent controversies

However, the controversy around Nehru’s exclusion in the museum is not the only one to have plagued the complex over the past few years.

In September 2018, the housing and urban affairs ministry sent a notice to the Jawaharlal Nehru Memorial Fund to vacate the Teen Murti Bhavan. The notice was sent following a letter from Sinha, who requested more space for the expansion of the library.

Also Read: Architect Raj Rewal Claims Design of Museum of Prime Ministers Is a ‘Rip-Off’

The following month, in October 2018, well-known architect Raj Rewal claimed his design had been plagiarised. He insisted that the museum’s design starkly resembled the library block of the State University of Performing and Visual Arts in Rohtak. The same month the “bhoomi pujan” of the museum was done in the lawns of the Teen Murti complex, behind the Nehru Memorial building.

SUPVA Library Block designed by Raj Rewal. Credit: supva.ac.in

Nehru was never in the scheme

It was during this event that Sinha declared that Nehru would not be a part of the new museum. He said: “No one will be left out. (Collections and works on Jawaharlal) Nehru will not move to the new building. He (Nehru’s collections) will stay where he is – in the current Nehru Memorial Museum, which was also his residence.”

At the same event, then culture minister Mahesh Sharma said future PMs will also be accommodated in the museum.

“The museum will accommodate future PMs as well. These will not just display the watches and umbrellas of the 14 Prime Ministers – be it P.V. Narasimha Rao, Charan Singh or H.D. Deve Gowda, or caretaker PM Gulzarilal Nanda – but also encapsulate the messages of their lives,” he said.

Then in November last year, the Modi government nominated new members to the NMML Society. Several of these were controversial figures and replaced eminent personalities. The prime minister is the president of the society, which falls under the Ministry of Culture.

Nehru Memorial Museum and Library. Credit: museumsofindia.org

Museum work progressing smoothly

In the meantime, the work on the museum has progressed significantly.

According to a plan document, the Museum Building Complex is envisioned to be a “a premiere institution focusing on collecting, documenting, researching, and disseminating information about the lives and contributions of the Prime Ministers of India.” It would use “state-of-the-art technology and would include the most effective tools of communication.”

The building’s design was arrived at after an international competition was held. The submission by M/s Sikka Associates was declared the winner. The proposed museum building will be built on an area of nearly 10,000 square metres.

Also Read: CPWD Sets March 2020 Target to Construct Museum on Prime Ministers at NMML

The museum, as per the plan document, will have at its core India’s democratic experience, as reflected in the works and words of its prime ministers. “The landmark achievements, works, thoughts, expressions and contributions of the Honorable Prime Ministers of India would form the ethos and core of the content and displayed on a digital platform in the proposed exhibition on Prime Ministers of India,” adds the document.

The total cost of the project is estimated to be Rs 226.20 crore, while the cost of content generation, display and technology would be Rs 89 crores, including operation and annual maintenance contract charges for five years.

Modern technology to provide immersive experience

The displays at the museum, the document said, will provide “an immersive experience, employing technologies to engage the five senses of the visitor”. The museum will strive to reach out to conventional museum goers, scholars as also students and tourist groups.

The displays are intended to be “rich and layered, based on digital storytelling experiences, employing state-of-art technology such as 3-D mapping techniques, touch-enabled displays, time machine, audio-visual projection, holograms and  modern acoustics”.

The museum will also showcase minimal personal effects of prime ministers as original exhibits and will relying more on their original writings, photographs, archives, speeches and interviews as display materials.

As of now, the tentative date for the museum’s opening is October 2020.

CPWD Sets March 2020 Target to Construct Museum on Prime Ministers at NMML

The NMML was set up in Jawaharlal Nehru’s memory as an autonomous institution under the Union Ministry of Culture.

New Delhi: The Central Public Works Department (CPWD) has set a target of March next year for constructing the Museum on Prime Ministers of India in the Teen Murti Bhavan complex here, which houses the Nehru Memorial Museum and Library (NMML), officials said.

According to a senior official, the CPWD has chosen an agency for the facade works of the museum, civil finishing, installation of lifts, escalators, CCTVs and sewage treatment plants (STPs) among others.

The iconic Teen Murti Bhavan was the official residence of Jawaharlal Nehru, the country’s first prime minister, and the NMML was set up on its premises in his memory as an autonomous institution under the Union Ministry of Culture.

“The construction work of the museum building is underway. At a recent meeting of the CPWD’s central works board, a private agency was chosen to execute the works of facade, civil finishing, lifts, escalators, CCTV cameras, STPs and security system among others,” the official said.

He added that these works would be carried out at a cost of around Rs 66 crore.

Also read: Failed Designs, Flouted Norms: A Tale of Two Housing Projects in Delhi

“We have set the target of March, 2020 to construct the Museum on Prime Ministers of India. Once it is completed, the building will be handed over to the Union Culture Ministry to shape other works required for museum,” he said.

When the government announced the museum in July 2018, there was some opposition from Congress leaders.

The then Union home minister Rajnath Singh had said the move was not an attempt to dilute the legacy of Nehru, who held the office of prime minister for 17 years.

The CPWD is the largest construction agency of the government and it looks after the maintenance of central government buildings and erecting of fences at the country’s international borders among others.

It also carries out projects in foreign countries under friendship programmes with India.

(PTI)

Modi Picks Arnab Goswami to Replace Pratap Bhanu Mehta at Nehru Memorial Library

Turmoil regarding the construction of a Museum for Prime Ministers appears to have had a bearing on the recent changes.

New Delhi: In a surprise development, well-known news anchor Arnab Goswami has been nominated by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, along with three others, to join the Nehru Memorial Museum and Library (NMML) Society as a member. The new appointees have replaced eminent personalities like academic Pratap Bhanu Mehta and economist Nitin Desai, who had strongly opposed the Centre’s move to set up a Museum for Prime Ministers within the Teen Murti premises just a few months ago. Teen Murti is closely linked with the legacy of the first Prime Minister and Congress leader Jawaharlal Nehru.

According to an order issued by the Union Ministry of Culture “with the approval” of the prime minister, Mehta’s resignation from the NMML Society was accepted and his spot on the board has gone to Goswami. Goswami is former editor-in-chief of Times Now and ET Now, and co-founded Republic TV with businessman-politician Rajeev Chandrashekhar.

Desai has been replaced by former journalist and author Ram Bahadur Rai, who was in 2016 also appointed by the Modi government to head the 20-member board of the Indira Gandhi National Centre for Arts.

Also read: ‘Political Pressure’ Bad for Academics: Pratap Bhanu Mehta’s Resignation Letter from NMMLAnother member, Dr. B.P. Singh, has been replaced by career diplomat and former foreign secretary of India, S. Jaishankar, who served as the Indian ambassador to the US, China and the Czech Republic, and high commissioner to Singapore. A key player during the negotiations of the Indo-US civilian nuclear agreement, Jaishankar joined the Tata group on his retirement.

The fourth person to find a place on the reconstituted NMML board is BJP national vice-president and Rajya Sabha MP Vinay Sahasrabuddhe. He heads the party’s think tank, Public Policy Research Centre, and was earlier appointed president of the Indian Council for Cultural Relations. He replaces the well known Assam-based scholar, Udayon Misra.

Congress opposition

Of the four new faces on the board, the one which appears to have irked the Congress the most is Goswami’s, whom party spokesperson Sanjay Jha described as a “religious bigot, who regularly spews hatred, spreads fake news and polarises society”. Accusing Goswami of being a BJP-RSS “mole masquerading as a TV anchor”, Jha tweeted that he would be sacked as soon as Congress wins the 2019 polls.

Many senior journalists also said that Goswami’s appointment was not a good idea as the NMML is a place for scholars, and not just for camp-followers.

Opposition to Museum for Prime Ministers

It is clear that the turmoil NMML witnessed over the issue of the Museum for Prime Ministers had a bearing on the recent changes.

The Wire had earlier reported on how the move to set up the Museum for Prime Ministers had gained traction after Mahesh Rangarajan, who was appointed by the UPA government, resigned in 2015 and retired IAS officer Shakti Sinha who had served in the PMO under Atal Bihari Vajpayee, took his place. Sinha had also served as the director of India Foundation, a think-tank aligned to the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh.

Mehta had opposed Sinha’s appointment and resigned as an executive council member in protest. Desai had also opposed the shortlisting of Sinha for the post.

When the Executive Council decided to amend the memorandum of association (MoA) of the NMML last year, members like Desai had opposed the idea.

He had submitted in writing that Nehru “represents a link between the freedom struggle and early years of independence and that his contribution to our evolution as a nation is qualitatively different from that of his many successors” and advocated the need to reject the proposed amendments. He had also demanded that Nehru’s successors be commemorated in a separate institutional context.

Also read: Private Prejudice as Public Policy is Displacing Teen Murti’s Most Revered ResidentThereafter, there were fireworks at a NMML board meeting in July this year. During the meeting, chaired by Union home minister Rajnath Singh, senior Congress leaders Jairam Ramesh, Mallikarjun Kharge and Karan Singh, historian Nayanjyot Lahiri, economist Nitin Desai and B.P. Singh had also opposed the idea to set up the Museum of Prime Ministers within the Teen Murti complex. They demanded that NMML retain its original mandate of preserving memorabilia and personal objects related to Jawaharlal Nehru.

But with the news changes to the board, the Centre has sent out a clear message that it will be calling the shots in the future.

Private Prejudice as Public Policy is Displacing Teen Murti’s Most Revered Resident

The symbolic dwarfing of ‘Nehru’s memorial’ is obviously meant to tell the nation who runs the country and on what terms.

When the former prime minister, who is known for his strict economy with words, writes a long letter – one of his rare ones – to his rather over-articulate successor, one assumes that the matter must be important. The letter I refer to is dated August 24, 2018, in which Manmohan Singh expresses deep concern at the move, initiated obviously at Narendra Modi’s behest, to change the character of the Nehru Museum Memorial and Library (NMML) from a memorial to Jawaharlal Nehru to one for “all PMs”.

India has had a total of 14 prime ministers, including Modi – and three among them are alive. Some spent just a few months in office which, frankly, did not permit them to make a mark on history. The plan that is underway, however, appears to literally ‘crowd out’ the memory of India’s first prime minister from the very precincts that were his home for 16 long years, right up to his death in 1964. It is reported that Rs 280 crore have been promised, just for starters. As the former culture secretary who liaised with NMML and is aware of the ground realities, one knows what great difficulties have to be surmounted in securing additional funding under the existing system.

However, before we take up Manmohan Singh’s insistence that “the museum must retain its primary focus on Jawaharlal Nehru and the freedom movement”, let us go over the facts. The Nehru Memorial Museum is set in a large campus that was built in 1930 to accommodate the residence of the commander of the British Empire’s army in India. It remains today one of the few patches of greenery that is left within the gasping lungs of Delhi. The premises, perhaps, constitute one of the handful of unspoilt, well maintained public spaces in Delhi that are actually open to the common citizen.

Also read: Museum for PMs at Teen Murti Seen as Attempt by Modi Regime to ‘Obliterate’ Nehru

Several publications have celebrated the memorial’s numerous species of ancient trees and the fascinating variety of birds that populate the campus. In fact, the ‘nature walks’ and ‘heritage tours’ that NMML organises within these grounds offer unforgettable treats to so many children and young men and women each year. The building itself is a handsome piece of Regency architecture that does not scream for attention like some neo-classical edifices do. Yet it does not fail to command a quiet dignity with its simple white and pink stone and stucco elegance. Designed and executed in 1930 by Robert Tor Russell, the same architect who presented Delhi with the imposing, signature buildings of Connaught Circus, this ‘Flagstaff House’ (as it was called) dared to break free from the almost ‘Soviet uniformity’ and boredom of plain, white shoe-box buildings of the Lutyens’ zone, that had a tiny portico and some faux pillars thrown in, for effect.

Its appellation ‘Teen Murti’ or ‘three statues’ refers to the very prominent landmark in the traffic island in front of its main gate – three Indian soldiers who face three different directions as their backs rest against a pointed obelisk. They symbolise Indian soldiers from the three largest princely states of Jodhpur, Hyderabad and Mysore who fought in the First World War. It was created by British sculptor Leonard Jennings and was installed eight years before ‘Flagstaff House’ was up.

Returning to the main campus, we have an impressive museum but what has assisted generations of serious researchers of colonial and post-colonial India is the enviable library. It has nearly three lakh books and two lakh photographs and it also houses a mind-boggling archive. Among its treasures are more than 1,200 collections of  ‘papers’ of Gandhi, Rajaji, G.D. Birla, P.N. Haksar and even Savarkar and Golwalkar who really need serious and dispassionate evaluation. There is a wealth of really useful microfilms and microfiches that scholars can access for priceless historical materials. In 1964, President Radhakrishnan was made chairman of the Jawaharlal Nehru Memorial Fund that offers fellowships and scholarships and this fund is also located in the campus. Till recently, NMML was a buzzing hub of open discussion and free debate under Mahesh Rangarajan, its former director, and speakers could criticise the government of the day, without fearing income-tax raids or dirty trolls.

Also read: The Nehru That India Cannot Forget

Rangarajan resigned in 2015, soon after the constitution of a new executive council (EC) of the NMML as he realised it was impossible to function normally when the 14th prime minister of India, who is also president of the NMML Society, constantly gunned for the first prime minister, in whose memory this institution was set up. He was certainly not willing to be an accomplice in plans that are palpably opposed to the NMML Society’s Memorandum of Association and rules. The chairman of the new EC, Lokesh Chandra, started the ball rolling by raising publicly a rather foxy concern: “Why should the Nehru Memorial remember only Nehru?” We are not sure what the vice chairman, M.J. Akbar said, just as we are not sure if he is still there or whether he has resigned. Nor do we know what the world’s lone Oxbridge apologist for the Hindu Right, Swapan Dasgupta, had to say. But then a fatuous query made by Chandra obviously amazed people, many of who had earlier held him in high regard for his contribution to Buddhist iconography and Vedic studies.

Teen Murti Bhavan. Credit: Wikimedia Commons

The symbolic dwarfing of ‘Nehru’s memorial’ is obviously meant to tell the nation who runs the country and on what terms.

In sharp contrast to Modi’s institutionalised meanness, we note Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s class, when he went into raptures to describe Pandit Nehru after his death – and Singh has reminded Modi about it. Vajpayee called Nehru “that vibrant personality, that attitude of taking even the opposition along, that refined gentlemanliness, that greatness we may not again see in the near future.” This eloquent praise hurts his party man Modi the most, for while he kissed the steps of parliament in grand theatrical style before cameras, he has never betrayed for a moment any fondness for the institutions of parliamentary democracy.

The way Modi reacts to the very name ‘Nehru’ is not normal, to say the least, and not a month has passed in the past 56 when he has not dragged Panditji out of his eternal rest at Shanti Vana, to punch him around, for any reason that strikes him. Psychologists and those in allied professions can give their diagnoses, but for us, it becomes a real problem when private prejudice masquerades as public policy – with the exchequer funding the spews that emanate.

Singh reminded Modi that Nehru had spent ten long years in jail during the freedom struggle, that “no amount of revisionism can obliterate that role and his contributions”. This perhaps touches a raw nerve of those who stayed far away from the national movement, like the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), which is the father of the party that currently runs the government. In fact, it is from the RSS that Modi rose, but equally important is the fact that his ‘guru’ and the ideologue of Hindutva, V.D. Savarkar of the Hindu Mahasabha did go to jail. What the Hindutva brigade can never live down is that Savarkar actually begged and pleaded with the British to release him at any cost, exposing his real character, as contrasted with, say, Gandhi, Nehru and the countless other patriots. Yet it is Savarkar’s followers who never cease to flaunt their ‘ultra-nationalism’ and terrorise others with excesses that obviously mask the fact that they were nowhere when ordinary Satyagrahis followed Gandhiji through the merciless batons and bullets. Modi must surely be conscious of the selfless sacrifice that Nehru made and this rankles him even more.

Also read: Narendra Modi and the Sangh Parivar are Trying to Appropriate the Strongly Secular Netaji

We have also no idea whether the NMML Society that is chaired by the prime minister has taken the final decision, as the public domain gives us no clue. If the PM had the courtesy of replying to his predecessor’s letter, the press would know first of course, but we would hear his stand on the issue. So, in the absence of a clear declaration from NMML, lesser mortals have to assume that “it has been decided” that Nehru has had enough of adulation from the nation. There is a bit of evidence that we shall discuss soon, but it is clear that Nehru should now share his glory with ten other dear, departed prime ministers. If we exclude from this list those like Lal Bahadur Shastri and Indira Gandhi, who already have well-visited memorials in Delhi. If it is only about a memorial, then we may recall that almost all deceased prime ministers have one, a sthal near Rajghat in Delhi in their name. Many have memorials in their honour in other cities, like Morarji Desai’s in Ahmedabad and Narasimha Rao’s in Hyderabad. Besides, does it not make better sense to have other more useful institutions in their name in towns associated with them, like, say a university of advanced agricultural sciences named after Charan Singh in Meerut.

The leaders ‘from the opposition’ (not ‘of the opposition’, since the present regime did not have the grace to permit one) are, of course, being assured that decisions would be on a consensus basis. But the website of NMML mentions that it wants “Expressions of interest” from competent parties to instal digital displays for the Prime Ministers’ Museum. Let us introduce some humour at this stage by asking readers to make sense of this vexatious piece of bureaucratese on the Nehru Memorial’s website that reads:

“Notice for limited tender enquiry for supply installation and commissioning of large multi-user tangible table and standalone transparent digital display with interactive digital content with software and hardware components integrating exhibition content and the final testing commissioning of the complete product along with warranty specifications for a special exhibition as part of the new museum project on prime ministers of India…”.

Whew! No comma, semi-colon, full stop. The short point, nevertheless, is that steps are underway to execute a project for “all prime ministers of India” within the present Nehru memorial. While committees and sub-committees may decide “how best to remember all of them”, the question is why destroy a developed campus and an institution that was brought up with love and care by some of India’s most distinguished sons and daughters? It is learnt that the current regime plans to devastate the unique back lawns, as it would not dare to build a building in front of the stately present one. This would surely destroy the skyline, serenity and gravitas of NMML forever, with a new CPWD-construction that are usually unimaginative eyesores.

It is unrealistic, however, to expect the ‘Amar-Chitra-Katha’ educated intellectuals of the Hindutva brigade to ever replicate the treasures of either the library or the archives of NMML in their proposed “Prime Ministers Memorial” – which could, actually, be built anywhere. For instance, one side of the famous octagon around India Gate does not have a worthy public building. But the regime appears hell-bent on damaging what already exists in Nehru’s name and the veritable ‘go slow’ at present in enriching the library, the archives and the digitisation project is just an example. After all, the favourite strategy of the ‘short’ banal, who just cannot stand excellence, has always been ‘cut the tall’. They are, poor souls, acutely conscious of their in-built inadequacies to reach the much-desired heights. As Singh put it “Jawaharlal Nehru belongs not just to the Congress, but to the entire nation”. Vajpayee, however, went a step ahead and rued that “such a resident may never grace Teen Murti ever again”.

Jawhar Sircar was culture secretary and CEO at Prasar Bharati. He writes on history of religion.

JNMF Asked to Vacate Teen Murti to Preserve Legacy of ‘Other Former PMs’: Centre

The government is planning a museum for all the former prime ministers of the country on the 25 acre Teen Murti Bhavan complex housing the Jawaharlal Nehru Memorial and needed space to expand, the eviction notice sent to JNMF said.

New Delhi: The Centre has said in its eviction notice that the Jawaharlal Nehru Memorial Fund (JNMF) was being asked to vacate its premises at Teen Murti Bhavan to preserve the legacy of “other former prime minister’s of India”.

The government is planning a museum for all the former prime ministers of the country on the 25 acre Teen Murti Bhavan complex housing the Jawaharlal Nehru Memorial and needed space to expand, the notice sent to JNMF said.

The notice, a copy of which is with PTI, said that the Nehru Memorial Museum and the Library Society’s executive committee, in its June meeting this year, discussed the “unauthorised occupation” of the barracks by the Fund, which has been a part of Teen Murti for the past 51 years.

On August 23, in a letter to the housing and urban affairs, the society requested the government to have the space vacated.

The notice said that the Nehru Memorial Museum Library (NMML) “is found to have been struggling to accommodate more space to achieve its objects and is in dire need of space in the Teen Murti Estate”.

“Considering the said proposals which appeared to be genuine, bonafide and in the interest of the objects of the said Society and in furtherance of achieving the goal of maintaining the legacy of Jawaharlal Nehru and Lal Bahadur Shastri, who last occupied the premises and the legacy of other former prime ministers of India, the matter was examined in the present context referred above,” the notice said.

Both the parties have cited a memorandum from January 1967, issued after the then prime minister, Lal Bahadur Shastri, declined to move into Teen Murti, which was the residence of India’s first prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru, to explain their case.

The memorandum said that the “Prime Minister’s Pool” of estates, including over half-a-dozen bungalows on Teen Murti Marg and Willingdon Crescent, were absorbed into the “General Pool” of government properties.

The NMML, which was registered the previous year, came to be “in occupation and possession” of Teen Murti Estate.

The notice says that while the NMML Society had in August 1967 submitted a request for the barracks – then being used as “an enquiry office-cum-godown” by the Central Public Works Department (CPWD) – to be given to the Fund for use, the property continues to be “owned by the central government” and the Society “never sought any sanction” for changing the occupation of that area.

Replying to the notice, the Fund’s administrator pointed out that the government had no right to evict them as the same 1967 memorandum said that the properties within the boundary walls of Teen Murti house were not a part of this transfer to the “General Pool”.

“The premises in the east of Teen Murti House and which are within the boundary wall of Teen Murti House will remain the property of the Nehru Memorial Museum and Library,” it said.

The Fund also said that it was “fully entitled to using this property as it has functioned in the public interest over the past half century or more in fulfilment of both its own objects and those of the [Nehru Memorial Museum and Library]”.

While the Housing Ministry has said that the Fund was liable to pay damages for “illegal occupation of the premises with effect from August 28, 1967,” and maintained on Tuesday that “all options, including issuance of show cause notice are being explored by us,” an official said.

“We have written the letter to them to withdraw the notice. We are waiting for their response. The charges are simply not true,” said Dr N. Balakrishnan, the Fund’s administrative secretary told PTI.

Established in 1964, the Fund’s offices are not part of the main building but occupy a set of barracks on its eastern side with a separate entry from Teen Murti Marg.