Central Vista: Delhi High Court verdict on Monday


Petition sought to halt the construction activities related to the project in view of the recent surge in COVID-19 cases in the national capital.

The Delhi High Court will pronounce on Monday its verdict on a petition seeking to halt the construction activities related to the Central Vista Project in view of the recent surge in COVID-19 cases in the capital.

A Bench of Chief Justice D.N. Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh had reserved the verdict on May 17 after hearing both sides of the parties.

The Centre has opposed the plea saying that it was a “facade” and a “disguise” in the form of a public interest litigation (PIL) petition to stall the project which they always wanted to stop.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehra, representing the Centre, had argued the public interest question raised by the petitioner in the case was “very selective”. He said the petitioners did not seem to care about the workmen of other construction activities going on the city.

Meanwhile, the Delhi Disaster Management Authority on Saturday allowed construction activities within their worksites outside the containment zones during the curfew period, which was extended in the city for another week.

Before the High Court, the petitions by Anya Malhotra, who works as a translator, and Sohail Hashmi, a historian and documentary film maker, have argued that the Central Vista project was not an essential activity and hence, it could be put on hold for now during the pandemic.

Senior advocate Sidharth Luthra, appearing for the petitioners, had argued that his clients were only delivering a message of health and safety for the people of Delhi and if the government could not see it, then it was a “sorry reflection” of their concerns for the lives of the citizens.

Mr. Luthra referred to the ongoing project work as not Central Vista, rather “central fortress of death”, comparing it to “Auschwitz”, a German concentration camp during World War II.

Solicitor General Mehta was displeased with the project being referred to as “Auschwitz” saying one could criticise and be venomous about it, but such terms should not be used in court.



This article was originally published on The Hindu

close-link