The Supreme Court on Friday highlighted the “extremely urgent” concern raised by two Delhi residents over the ferrying of labourers to and fro the Central Vista redevelopment site amid a devastating public health crisis, and permitted them to approach the Delhi High Court Chief Justice on Monday with a request to hear their case as “early as possible”.
A Bench of Justices Vineet Saran and Dinesh Maheshwari said the mention for an urgent hearing before the Delhi High Court Chief Justice could even be made jointly by the petitioners’ lawyer, senior advocate Siddharth Luthra, and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, for the Centre.
Also read: Green panel clears Central Vista projects
The petitioners, Anya Malhotra and Sohail Hashmi, had moved the Supreme Court after the Delhi High Court adjourned the hearing of their case to May 17, ostensibly to “study” a judgment of the Supreme Court pronounced on January 5, allowing the Central Vista project.
The Supreme Court said that since the case was already pending before the High Court, it did not want to enter into its merits. However, the Bench said the case could be heard by the High Court “as early as possible”.
Mr. Luthra said the workers were ferried by bus from Karol Bagh, Kirti Nagar and Sarai Kale Khan. The work seemed to continue owing to a stringent deadline.
“But how can construction be an essential activity when there is a public health crisis on? We are in a position that the caseload may peak by mid-May, and the HC keeps the case on May 17 to study a judgment? Please understand, this is a peculiar situation... HC adjourns to May 17 without notice... We are facing a humanitarian crisis. When human lives are concerned, government needs to protect”. From April 1 to May 3, the positivity rate had ‘shot up’ from 3.57% to about 30%,” he said.
Also read: Supreme Court allows foundation-laying ceremony for new Parliament building
Mr. Luthra referred to how many who were near and dear were affected by the virus. “Today when the health system is broken... People are not getting beds...”, he said.
Justice Saran said, “We are conscious of it. A Different Bench is seized of this issue... Mr. Luthra, you can make comments about deaths, but we cannot, it may be taken otherwise...”
Circular
Mr. Luthra referred to a Disaster Management Authority circular, which had directed construction activities, except where labourers are residing onsite, to be stopped. He said the petitioners were only concerned with the work on the Rajpath, Central Vista and garden stretches and no other. “The nation is considering a lockdown, IPL has been shut off. Despite the Centre' great efforts to supply oxygen, there is an unprecedented spread of infection. On May 17, we would have reached the peak...”
Mr. Mehta objected to the special leave petition filed against an order of adjournment by the High Court. “It sets a bad precedent... Our HCs are functioning under great constraints... There are severally factually incorrect statements being made,” he submitted.
However, disposing off the case, the Bench asked the lawyers to take their arguments to the High Court. It advised Mr. Luthra and Mr. Mehta to “join together” and mention the case before the High Court on Monday for an early hearing.
