PIL against Central Vista a disguise to stall project: Centre
New Delhi: The Centre on Monday opposed in the Delhi High Court a PIL to halt the construction of the Central Vista project in view of the pandemic and alleged that the plea was a "facade" to stall the work.
The petitioners on the other hand contended they were only interested in the safety of the workers at the site and the citizens lives and compared the project to "Auschwitz", a German concentration camp during World War-II.
Hard hitting arguments against the maintainability of the plea and the continuation of the project were made during the over three hour long hearing before a bench of Chief Justice D N Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh which reserved its judgement in the matter.
Shapoorji Pallonji and Company Pvt Ltd, which has been awarded the tender for the project, also opposed the PIL, saying it lacks bona fide and the company was taking care of its workforce.
Opposing the claims of the petitioners, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said that the plea was a "facade", a "disguise" in the form of a PIL to stall the project which they always wanted to stop.
Senior advocate Sidharth Luthra, appearing for the petitioners, told the court that his clients were only delivering a message of health and safety for the people of Delhi and if the government cannot see it, then it was a "sorry reflection" of their concerns for the lives of the citizens. Referring to the ongoing project work as not Central Vista, rather "central fortress of death" and comparing it to "Auschwitz", Luthra contended that the Centre's submissions with regard to availability of medical facilities, testing centre, etc on site were all falsehoods.
He said that only empty tents have been set up at the place and there were no beds or bedding for workers to stay or sleep there. Mehta was displeased with the project being referred to as Auschwitz saying one can criticise and be venomous about it, but such terms should not be used in court.
Luthra also contended that while the Centre claims some workers stayed back willingly to work on the project, no proof of their willingness has been shown. He also said that if any facilities have been created at the site, it was for the reason that the high court agreed to hear the matter.
Countering the claims of the petitioners, the Solicitor General said one of the petitioners has been opposed to the project long before it got the go ahead from the Supreme Court in January this year. He said the petitioners were not concerned for the health and safety of workers at the other constructions going on in the city.
"Public interest is very selective (in the instant case) with regard to health of workmen," he added and urged the court to dismiss the plea.
Senior advocate Maninder Singh, appearing for Shapoorji Pallonji, told the court that there was no law under which he has to place on record a worker's willingness to work.
He said the petitioners cannot decide what was the safe time line for completing the project and the company had to finish it by November so that the Republic Day parade can be held on the Rajpath.
