Mahatma Gandhi’s great grandson moves Supreme Court against redevelopment of Sabarmati Ashram

A plea has been filed before the Supreme Court by Tushar Gandhi, great grandson of Mahatma Gandhi, challenging a Gujarat High Court order which refused to interfere with the proposed redevelopment of the Sabarmati Ashram by the State of Gujarat [Tushar Arun Gandhi v State of Gujarat]..Senior Advocate Indira Jaising mentioned the appeal before Chief Justice of India (CJI) NV Ramana seeking urgent listing of the case."I need a virtual hearing day. Construction will start," Jaising said."List on a virtual hearing day," the CJI directed..The petitioner claimed that the Gujarat High Court had dismissed the plea and refused to quash the Government Resolution on a “limited misleading statement made by the Advocate General without taking into account the grievances raised by the petitioner”..The Advocate General had informed the High Court that the Sabarmati Ashram covers an area of 1 acre which would remain untouched, and the idea was to develop 55 acres of land surrounding the Ashram..In relation to this, the petition stated that the significance of the land was not limited to the one-acre Ashram itself but covered the entire property on the banks of the Sabarmati which was more than 100 acres.“The land serves as a source of inspiration and stands as a monument to Gandhiji’s life mission," the plea said. .Sabarmati Ashram will remain untouched; only surrounding land will be modified: Gujarat govt tells Gujarat High Court.In the plea, the petitioner expressed fears that the redevelopment would change the physical structure of Sabarmati Ashram and corrupt its simplicity and frugality which embodied the ideology of Mahatma Gandhi, thus making it diametrically opposite to Gandhian principles.“The petitioner is apprehensive that the nature of redevelopment and over-sized involvement of the government authorities in the conception and execution of the said project, the ashram may lose the Gandhian ethos that has been painstakingly preserved by the Trust,” it was contended..Further, the petitioner feared that the project would be turned into a commercial tourist attraction that would subsequently be pawned off to a private contractor to be run merely for profit.