Court revamp: Punjab and Haryana HC asks administrative panel to expedite hiring of consultant

Senior counsel Rupinder Khosla, representing the High Court Bar Association, pressed for immediate steps to avoid missing the December 31 cut-off. He submitted that the administrative committee, which includes the chief architect and chief engineer of the UT, should be permitted to devise a via media to approve a consultant so that the project reaches “stage eleven” of the procedural chart placed before the court. He argued that failure to meet the deadline could push the plan back by two years.

Khosla said the scope of work had already been discussed within the committee and that the maximum area available for redevelopment had been identified. He urged the court to allow the committee to take a final call on the consultant, with the remaining processes to follow the regular bidding route.

Senior standing counsel Amit Jhanji, representing the UT administration, told the bench that several steps listed in the UT’s affidavit had not yet been completed, including the invitation of expressions of interest and the technical evaluation of applicants. He said the court’s earlier order of November 21 required the UT to publish an expression of interest within one week for appointing a consultant with experience in court infrastructure and heritage sites, and that these directions would have to be harmonised with any new methodology the administrative committee was asked to follow.

Jhanji added that the plan required three major tasks at the outset. These were the appointment of the consultant, completion of the heritage impact assessment, and securing clearance from the Chandigarh Heritage Conservation Committee, with other steps being ancillary. He said the heritage impact assessment could begin immediately and should proceed in parallel.

‘2014 plan redundant’

Additional Solicitor General Satya Pal Jain, appearing for the Union of India, referred to the prevailing 2025 procurement rules and cautioned that single-source selection or direct negotiations for consultant appointment could only be used in exceptional circumstances. He said any shortcut would require full justification and competent authority approval and warned that neither the UT nor the Centre could violate the statutory procedure unless the court issued specific directions.

Jain said the earlier holistic plan, cleared in 2014, had now become redundant because it covered only 3 lakh square feet, while the present proposal spans 11 lakh square feet. He submitted that the court could formally shelve the earlier project on the judicial side and authorise the administrative committee to prioritise shortlisted consultants and take a decision within a week, which would protect the process from later challenges.

Chief Justice Nagu indicated that the administrative committee would be asked to evolve the procedure, attempt shortlisting within the constraints of law, and return to the court for final approval. The bench observed that this was likely the quickest route, since all stakeholders were represented on the committee.