Central Vista Project

INTRODUCTION

A debate started on the Central Vista Project after an announcement of the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs (MOHUA) in September 2019 about the ambitious redevelopment of Lutyen’s Delhi. This is a grand redevelopment project of Central Vista- Nation’s Power Corridor, which envisages a new triangular Parliament building, common Central Secretariat, and revamp of 3 kilometres long Rajpath from the Rashtrapati Bhavan to the India Gate. The project is expected to cost Rs. 13,450 crores to the Government of India.  

The new Parliament building, which is expected to be completed by the 75th anniversary of India’s Independence in 2022, will house Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha chambers with capacities of 888 seats and 384 seats to accommodate an expanded Parliament after the next delimitation exercise is proposed to take place in 2026. The new building will have a grand Constitutional Hall showcasing India’s democratic heritage, and on the other side, there will be a Constitution Gallery displaying a copy of the Constitution of India.

HISTORY

The entire planned construction area of New Delhi, including the existing Parliament, was constructed by the Britishers. The 20-year long project unveiled in 1931 was designed by Edwin Lutyens and Herbert Baker following the decision of the British to shift the Government of India’s headquarters from Calcutta to Delhi in December 1911. They constructed majestic Rashtrapati Bhawan, Parliament House, North and South Blocks, Rajpath, and India Gate, among others.

NEED FOR CENTRAL VISTA

The idea for revamp of Parliament is not a recent one as few Members of Parliament have underlined the need for redevelopment of Parliament Building on various occasions. On 13th July 2012, Officer on Special Duty to the then Lok Sabha Speaker Meira Kumar wrote a letter to the Urban Development Secretary asking it to plan and identify suitable construction sites for the construction of the new Parliament Building. Similarly, one letter was written by Speaker Sumitra Mahajan on December 9, 2015, suggesting the Urban Development Ministry initiate the construction of a new Parliament building. 

The need for this redevelopment project is to create a larger working space for the efficient functioning of the Parliament and for an integrated administrative block for Ministries that are located in different parts of the City on a rental basis. According to the Central Government, it is paying an amount equivalent to about Rs. 1000 crores on rental spaces to accommodate the offices of various Ministries annually, and therefore, this project will save thousands of crores of the Central Government. 

SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENT

A three-judge bench of the Supreme Court in Rajiv Suri v. Delhi Development Authority <1> heard various petitions challenging the Central Vista Project and permissions given to the project by different authorities, including the environmental clearance and nod to change in land use. Justice AM Khanwilkar and Justice Dinesh Maheshwari by 2:1 majority granted green signal to this redevelopment project while Justice Sanjiv Khanna had a dissenting opinion. 

In its judgment, the Supreme Court dealt in detail on various Constitutional aspects, which included Rule of Law, Constitutionalism, Democratic Due Process, and Judicial Review. 

The majority held that the modifications were minor and within the purview of the law. They said that the Court could not exercise the power of Judicial Review and venture into the mind of the Government and examine the validity of the decision, and also, it is not the Court’s concern to enquire into the priorities of an elected Government. It also approved the no-objection certificate by the Central Vista Committee and environmental clearances granted for the construction of the new Parliament building. Further, the Judges in the majority were of the opinion that the Government has proved proposed use of public resources is aligned in the direction of beneficial use and public interest and has elaborately demonstrated the imminent need for the project. 

While on the other hand, Justice Khanna, while striking down the redevelopment project, expressed his dissent on the aspects of public participation on the interpretation of the statutory provisions, the order passed by the Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC), and failure to take prior approval of Heritage Conservation Committee (HCC), adding that the matter has to be remitted back for a public hearing. He further added that the clearance given by the Central Vista Committee was pre-mediated and without the application of the mind. He held that environmental clearance was a non-speaking order. 

Public Participation was one of the contentious issue on which majority and minority differed. The majority argued that a fine balance must be drawn between public participation and administrative functioning. It must be borne in mind that public participation is not to delay the development work rather, it is to invite constructive suggestions from the stakeholders. On the other hand, Justice Khanna argued that Public participation to be fruitful and constructive is not to be a mechanical exercise or formality, rather it should comply with the least and basic requirements of the law. 

The Supreme Court, in its final order, directed the project proponent to set up a smog tower and use smoke guns at the construction site till the work is in progress.

CONCLUSION

The Central Vista Project has faced criticism from many corners of the society immediately after an announcement about the project in September 2019. The necessity of the project has been questioned, especially in times when the Indian economy has witnessed its worst contraction in the decades. The opposition and other stakeholders have also asked the government to put this project on hold for now. However, the Central Government is keen to carry on with its dream project after the Supreme Court has provided a green signal to the project.   

2021 SCC Online SC 7.