[Challenge Against Central Vista Project] Live-Updates From Supreme Court

Hegde: The Karnataka HC was built as the Secretariat. It became as the HC when the Vidhan Souda was built across it. There was then an initiative to demolish it. There was a plea challenging it and the HC didn’t do anything, and neither did the SC.

Hegde: We are men of law and we rely on words. But, architects think in terms of spaces. Today, we are talking about a space that is sacred to modern in terms of its evolution as a nation. When we are analysing the modernisation of the space, we need to consider some things.

Matter has commenced.

Sr. Adv. Sanjay Hegde is now arguing on behalf of Petitioner.

Hegde submits that the Petitioner is not against architectural initiatives as such, but there should be a sense of public participation. 

Matter will resume post lunch.

Bhatia states that Mr. Divan had taken the Court through the Kenyan High Court’s judgement and Justice Khanna had asked about the right of public participation.

He further submits that the task of judiciary is to flesh out the rights from the Constitution.

Bhatia now arrives at the Delhi Urban Arts Commission: This was established under the DUAC Act and the mandate was clearly set up and the Commission’s purpose was to maintain the aesthetic quality of the skyline.

Bhatia notes that how the CVC was convinced that a very elaborate new parliament plan was in compliance with the rules and regulations.

Bench: Mr. Divan has argued this already.

Bhatia: Then I will leave it at that.

Bhatia: With respect to the Central Vista Committee, we submit that their task is to bring about strict architectural control. 

Adv. Gautam Bhatia seeks for ten minutes to argue the matter. 

Bhandari highlights the aspect of transparency - for instance, changes to the PM’s house was not mentioned in the beginning, but it was present in the Respondent’s submission.