Central Vista Project: Delhi High Court's decision to give green signal to construction challenged in Supreme Court

The matter of Central Vista has once again reached the Supreme Court. The Delhi High Court's decision refusing to stop the Central Vista redevelopment activities has been challenged in the Supreme Court. This appeal has been filed by advocate Pradeep Kumar Yadav. Interestingly, Yadav was not a party to the proceedings in the Delhi High Court.

It has also been said in the petition that the High Court was also not proper to say that the workers of the Central Vista project are living at the project site, while the government and the SPCPL (the company that built the project) clearly stated in their affidavits It was said that the workers were living in the camp of Sarai Kale Khan, which is not the project site.

A movement pass was issued to bring and take laborers and supervisors from Sarai Kale Khan. On March 20 last year, the Center had issued a notification regarding change in land use for the Rs 20,000 crore project, which pertains to 86 acres of land in central Delhi which includes buildings like Rashtrapati Bhavan, Parliament House, Central Secretariat.

It is to be known that on January 5, the Supreme Court had dismissed petitions challenging the project alleging violation of land use and environmental norms. After this, during the second wave of Corona, a petition was filed in the Delhi High Court demanding a temporary ban on construction activities due to Corona.

Central Vista is an essential project, work will continue: HC

Earlier on Monday, the Delhi High Court, while allowing the continuation of the construction work of the Central Vista project, said that it is an important and necessary project of national importance. Simultaneously, the court dismissed the petition against the project, saying that it was motivated and malicious with some motive.

The bench had imposed a fine of Rs one lakh on the petitioners while dismissing the petition requesting to stop the project during the Corona epidemic. The court said it disagrees with the claim that the project is not an essential activity and, therefore, should be put on hold during the current pandemic.