Sir,

This is in response to the ‘Voice of the Reader’ titled “Some Musings on Rebuilding Heritage Bettada Aramane” by George Rego in Star of Mysore dated Sept. 23.

While thanking George Rego for expressing his opinion on rebuilding of Bettada Aramane at Chamundi Hill, I wish to clarify that the decision to rebuild Bettada Aramane was taken because there was no scope for restoring the old structure.

The building had deteriorated completely due to age, with the wooden beams and rafters disintegrated and the mortar used in the construction having lost its strength and integrity.

This is a building belonging to the Royal Family of Mysore. I have vivid memory of watching the ‘Sri Chamundeshwari Rathotsava’ along with my  mother-in-law, late H.H. Smt. Tripurasundarammanniavaru, from the balcony of the old Palace structure in the late seventies and early eighties.

My husband, late Sri Srikantadatta Narasimharaja Wadiyar, had permitted the building to be used to run a Government School for children on the Hill. Many years later, an alternative arrangement was made for the school.

By then, the deterioration of the structure had reached such an advanced stage that rebuilding was the only practical option. Had there been even a remote possibility of safely restoring the original structure, restoration would certainly have been the preferred choice.

It is also important to clarify that Bettada Aramane was, and continues to be, a private residence after completion. Structural condition and circumstances are therefore not directly comparable with heritage structures such as Devaraja Market and the Lansdowne Building.

Devaraja Market continues to be a functional building, with only a portion of the structure having collapsed.

The Lansdowne Building, as per my understanding, was primarily constructed with a steel structural framework capable of supporting the building. These are significant structural differences that need to be considered before drawing comparisons.

Further, as reported in the media, the Supreme Court of India sought the opinion of conservation experts regarding the historic buildings owned and managed by Mysuru City Corporation. Based on the expert opinion and considering their heritage value, the Court directed that the buildings should not be demolished, instead be restored.

Therefore, comparing the rebuilding of Bettada Aramane with the restoration of Devaraja Market or the Lansdowne Building would not be appropriate without taking into account their differing structural conditions, uses and heritage significance.

The objective was never to disregard conservation. On the contrary, the decision to rebuild Bettada Aramane was necessitated in the absence of a viable restoration option.

—Pramoda Devi Wadiyar of Mysore Royal Family

Mysuru

30.9.2026