Thread by @barandbench

Challenge to Central Vista: Hearing commences before 3- judge bench of Supreme Court.

Advocate Vrinda Bhandari making arguments.

#CentalVista

Bhandari submits NIT makes it clear there is no estimated cost.

There is no upper limit for the estimated cost, says Bhandari.

#CentralVista

There are 3 project costs slabs provided by govt. But the third slab says above 5000 crores.

This would mean each consultant would be free to decide what will be the cost and design of the project.

The govt has failed to provide an upper limit and there is no estimate of costs put out in public domain till date: Bhandari.

Bench: We do not have any complaint from any bidder that the formula has worked to the advantage or disadvantage of any of the bidders.

So what is the problem with this? How is it affecting transparency or uniformity. The methodology is uniform to all. So what is the problem?

Bhandari: It is violative of Rule 182 of General Financial Rules of 2017. The rule relates to estimation of reasonable expenditure concerning appointment of consultant.

#CentralVista #SupremeCourt

Justice AM Khanwilkar: This Rule won't help you.

Bhandari: Nowhere in the NIT is it estimated that project cost would be Rs. 10,000 crore.

#CentralVista

Bhandari: The govt argument is that capping of consultancy fee amounts to compliance with statutory provision relation to estimation of project cost.

#CentralVista #SupremeCourt

Justice AM Khanwilkar: What can be filled out from the process is that there was no clear planning or estimation.

But can the entire NIT process be doubted due to this? The process cannot be struck down due to that.

#CentralVista #SupremeCourt

Bhandari: There should be an estimated cost. My argument is that the upper slab of more than 5,000 crore is not an estimated cost since it can be 5,000-7,000 cr or 5,000-15,000 Cr or 5,000 - 20,000 Cr.

#CentralVista #SupremeCourt

Bhandari: Even after NIT was published, the design and costs were changed.

Justice AM Khanwilkar: In any tender work, additional work is permitted.

#CentralVista #SupremeCourt

Bhandari concludes.

Advocate @gautambhatia88 commences arguments.

Gautam Bhatia: The first challenge is to the April 30 order of Central Vista Committee. The order grants NOC to Central Vista project.

#CentralVista #SupremeCourt

GautamBhatia: It is a non-speaking order and does not give any reasons on requirement of new parliament or compliance with the procedure.

#CentralVista #SupremeCourt

Bhatia: Second challenge is to the July order of Delhi Urban Arts Commission (DUAC).

Bench says Shyam Divan has already dealt with these aspects.

Bhatia relies on Kenyan case law to demonstrate what the right public to participation would entail in cases like these.

Bhatia concludes his arguments.

Bench rises for lunch. Will re-assemble at 2 pm.

#CentralVista #SupremeCourt

Supreme Court hears challenge to the Central Vista Project [LIVE UPDATES]

barandbench.com/news/litigatio…

#CentralVista: Bench reassembles.

Senior counsel Sanjay Hegde commences arguments on behalf of petitioner.

Hegde says petitioner not against such architectural initiatives but there should be a sense of public participation.

#SupremeCourt

Sanjay Hegde: We are dealing with a space which is important to India in terms of its history and evolution.

#CentralVista #Parliament #SupremeCourt

Hegde cites history of Karnataka and Delhi high court buildings and how old buildings of those high courts were integrated with new ones.

#CentralVista #SupremeCourt

Hegde showing to the bench photos of new building of Delhi high court which he submits resembles and co-exists with the old building.

#CentralVista #SupremeCourt

Hegde: When Supreme Court was built, there was a model out there for public consultation.

Hegde shows a photo of then President of India, Rajendra Prasad inspecting a scale model of Supreme Court much before the building was constructed.

#CentralVista

Hegde explains how the Supreme Court and various high courts buildings came to acquire the shape they eventually took.

Hegde: The emphasis is to try and illustrate what such architecture means for the public and to show how much thought was put into such architecture.

#CentralVista #SupremeCourt

Hegde: Despite nation wide lockdown and objections, NOC was given to the project by the Central Vista Committee by way of a meeting held via video conferencing and without giving any reasons. The meeting was headed by ADG Works who has experience only in road maintenance.

Hegde: The decision was not a reasoned one and it only made one observation - that the features of proposed new Parliament building should be in sync with the existing one.

"In sync" can mean anything.

#CentralVista #SupremeCourt

Hegde says it was a rubber stamp decision by the Central Vista Committee.

Bench asks Hegde about the establishment and scope of powers of Central Vista Committee.

#CentralVista #SupremeCourt

Hegde says it was based on an office memorandum issued by executive.

Bench: So it has its basis on a broad observation in an office memorandum and it is not a statutory committee. Its advice is not binding and it can advice if something is referred to it.

Justice Dinesh Maheshwari: It is a study group to advice the govt. It is not a decision making body.

Is a committee bound to give reasons for its decisions under administrative law?

#CentralVista #SupremeCourt

Hegde: Your Lordships are right in that govt is not bound by their advice. But as and when any matter is referred to Central Vista Committee, can we look at the previous actions of the committee and see how the committee's action in this case was not in sync with previous actions

Justice AM Khanwilkar: Can final decision taken by statutory authority be doubted based on some doubts regarding the decision taken by Central Vista Committee?

#CentralVista #SupremeCourt

Justice AM Khanwilkar: Should the final decision which is otherwise correct be faulted because the advisory body committed a mistake?

Hegde: If there is a fault in the process, then the final decision should be relooked.

#CentralVista #SupremeCourt #Parliament #NewDelhi

Hegde asks for some time tomorrow to complete the arguments.

Bench agrees. Court also asks Shikil Suri, counsel for another petitioner to conclude arguments tomorrow.

Court says Solicitor General would also have to be given time to respond to the petitioners' arguments.

#CentralVista: Hearing draws to a close for the day.

Supreme Court says it will conclude the hearing in the case by Thursday.

We will say good bye to this matter by then, Justice Khanwilkar says.