Thread by @barandbench

#CentralVista: Hearing commences before Supreme Court.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta to continue his submissions on behalf of Central government.

#CentralVista: Mehta now arguing on the award of contract.

There was no element of arbitrariness or favouritism in selection of consultant: Mehta.

#CentralVista: There is no contesting consultant before Your Lordships saying they would have qualified if they had more time.

There was no element of personal subjectivity in the selection: Mehta.

#CentralVista: Widest choice was given to applicants, Mehta submits.

Court raises queries on certain conditions to participate in the bid, particularly the condition relating to past experience in India.

Court says the condition effectively limits the bid to Indian consultants.

Mehta says no international firm came forward saying they were eligible but for this condition.

#CentralVista: The conditions on past experience and financial robustness is for the benefit of the project: Mehta.

#CentralVista: Joint ventures were not allowed since such ventures usually ends up in arbitration: Mehta.

#CentralVista: Mehta reads out technical and financial conditions stipulated by the govt to be eligible to bid for consultant position.

#CentralVista: This is not a petition by any of the bidders. We want you to satisfy us on the issues raised by petitioners instead of going into minute details: Bench says.

#CentralVista: Bench remarks that unless the design is so atrocious, the issue of appointment of consultant should not arise.

Mehta tells court about a design submitted by one of the bidders of a hanging parliament over Vijay Chowk which was rejected.

#CentralVista: There was no abdication of duty in selection of consultant. Every stakeholders participated in the process and gave suggestions: Mehta.

#CentralVista: An argument that govt could have adopted a better process cannot be a sufficient ground to scrap the project: Mehta.

#CentralVista: The Central Vista Committee is only a broad advisory body and does not give approvals: Tushar Mehta.

#CentralVista: The argument of petitioners is that CVC has not given reasons for its order on the project. My submission is that they have given reasons in a manner which is in tune with their advisory nature: Mehta.

#CentralVista: CVC could have looked into the project as a whole and is not concerned with nitty gritties of the building: Mehta.

#CentralVista: The argument is that CVC rushed through with its meeting during Covid times in April despite objections by members who sought adjounrnment: Bench.

#CentralVista: Those members could have joined through video conferencing. Entire world was familiar with Video conference: Mehta

Not in April: Bench.

We would have helped them (on technical side): Mehta.

#CentralVista: The petitioner has not pointed out any Constitutional imperative or statutory requirement that the project can be done only pursuant to a law: Mehta.

#CentralVista: Mehta now making arguments on the nature of democracy in India.

"Our govt functions through Council of ministers which is answerable to the parliament and parliament in turn is accountable to the people. That is the nature of our representative democracy," Mehta.

#CentralVista: Bench rises for lunch.

#CentralVista: Bench reassembles, hearing resumes.

#CentralVista: Participative democracy under our Constitution is different. The method of such participation is representative participation: Tushar Mehta.

#CentralVista: Their argument is there should be some referendum of sorts on whether there should be new Parliament building.

But here the decision is taken by competent authority, there is no allegation of colourable exercise of power and the decision is not atrocious: Mehta.

#CentralVista: Our country so huge and diverse that I don't think the Constitution makes intended for a participative democracy in a manner which the petitioner has now claimed: Mehta.

#CentralVista: Petitioners have not shown any Constitutional or statutory breach. They have only offered an alternative method and even if that method is better, it will not be a reason to scrap the project: Tushar Mehta.

#CentralVista: The manner of participation of public which petitioners are projecting is very catchy. But if such participative process suggested by petitioners is accepted, the results will be lop sided and not as contemplated by the Constitution: Mehta.

#CentralVista: Recent trend is to involve Constitutional morality and due process clause from USA in every case.

Due process is not contemplated by our Constitution: Tushar Mehta.

#CentralVista: We have our own jurisprudence including Art.14 which covers non-discrimination, non arbitrariness etc.

I don't therefore find it necessary to go on a world tour and rely on Congo or South Africa: Tushar Mehta.

#CentralVista: Law and Constitutional values evolve differently in each society depending on their social values.

My submission therefore is foreign judgments are not applicable: Tushar Mehta.

#CentralVista: Substantive due process doctrine does not apply to India: Mehta

Justice Khanwilkar: Rule of law applies to India? Due process is part of rule of law. They are saying you are following rule by law and not rule of law.

#CentralVista: Tushar Mehta: Rule of law means adherence to Indian Constitution and law. Their argument of due process is an extension of substantive due process of America.
We have our Constitution and should not deviate from it.

#CentralVista: Bench rises for the day; Hearing to continue tomorrow.