Last week, Bowrings, the much-hyped auction house, sent out letters to its associates informing them that it will cease its Indian operations till the controversial issue regarding its licence to trade in antiquities is resolved.
A decade ago, Sotheby's India Pvt Ltd, a joint venture between the blue-blooded auction house and the Modi's, was also forced to shut shop.
So, what's common between the two closures? A bunch of officials of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) who want to put a stop to the transparent sale of art works and the subsequent growth and maturity of the Indian art market.
In a liberalised India where controls are being done away with, culture continues to remain in the hands of the babus and license raj is thriving like never before.
Bowrings, which opened its doors to the Indian public, in August 2001, didn't quite get off to the most brilliant start.
The work on the cover of its catalogue, a Bendre, was a fake and had to be withdrawn. That was not all. Bowrings managed to keep itself in the news for all the wrong reasons.
A work by Hemen Mazumdar in its subsequent sale was a stolen one and its consignor was arrested in Kolkata. Things didn't quite stop here.
The auction house attempted to sell a collection of film memorabilia the next year which was contracted legally to another buyer and the entire collection too had to be withdrawn.
To most readers, this catalogue of faux pas paints a rather tainted picture of Bowrings.
However, it is important to look at Bowings from another angle. It is the sheer transparency and professionalism that an auction house like Bowrings brings to the table that helps the art market immensely.
Fake works, when passed off as real, come under scrutiny, as did the Bendre and many others subsequently. Thieves who consign stolen works get caught.
A big gang was arrested in Kolkata and several stolen paintings were recovered. Not to mention the fact that 45 items worth over Rs 2 crore (Rs 20 million) actually got registered with the ASI across India.
Also, Bowrings operated legally and its business benefited the government -- it earned over Rs 1 crore (Rs 10 million) from a completely new revenue stream.
Besides, the international auction house was also helping develop a market in areas outside contemporary and antique art such as furniture, silver, objects and textiles.
Meanwhile, the ASI sat on Bowrings' request for a licence, though it should hardly have been an issue for its officials.
The ASI actually has much bigger issues to grapple with such as large-scale smuggling of items as big as antique cars that are smuggled out of India making their way to auctions and dealers across the globe.
Barely 10 days before Bowrings' last sale, the ASI and the CBI "raided" its offices to get hold of the Ravi Varmas which the auctioneers were transparently selling through its published and widely promoted catalogue at a public place!
The Ravi Varmas belonged to a trust and would have probably gone to a collection where they would have been well looked after.
In the process, they would have got documented, authenticated and, perhaps, restored.
In addition, they would have generated revenue for the government.
It is hard to fathom why the ASI is throwing out foreign investment at every given chance.
Why doesn't the body raid the warehouses of the National Museum and take those people to task who fail to take adequate care of our national heritage?
Bowrings' recent exit could easily push the Indian art market's development back by at least a decade.
It goes on to show that despite the opinion of a chief justice of India, the ASI continues to interpret the law the way it feels like.
It is symbolic of the attitude that thrives in the Indian bureaucracy. More importantly, it proves that the licence raj lives on.