'SCBA Cannot Assert Right Over Entire Land Allotted To SC' : Supreme Court Refuses To Consider Association's Plea On Judicial Side
The Supreme Court on Thursday held that it cannot consider on the judicial side the plea of the Supreme Court Bar Association to convert the entirety of 1.33 acres of the land allotted to the Top Court by the Central Government as space for lawyers' chambers."SCBA cannot assert a right over the entirety of the 1.33 acres of land allotted to Centre for converting to lawyers chambers", a...
The Supreme Court on Thursday held that it cannot consider on the judicial side the plea of the Supreme Court Bar Association to convert the entirety of 1.33 acres of the land allotted to the Top Court by the Central Government as space for lawyers' chambers.
"SCBA cannot assert a right over the entirety of the 1.33 acres of land allotted to Centre for converting to lawyers chambers", a bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice SK Kaul and Justice PS Narasimha held. However, the bench has left the issue open to be considered on the administrative side.
The bench noted that the space was allotted to the Supreme Court by the Union Ministry for various purposes including the housing of the archives. The Court has to balance the needs to various stakeholders, including lawyers and litigants, for both the present and the future.
"These are matters which cannot be resolved by application of judicial standards and have to be taken on the administrative side of the Supreme Court", CJI Chandrachud read out the operative portion of the judgment.
The second prayer in the SCBA plea was to convert the entire area around the Supreme Court as a "Supreme Court Block" so that all buildings across the Supreme Court on the Bhagwandas Road can be utilised for conversion as lawyers chambers. The SCBA also sought the allotment of the building occupied by the Foreign Correspondents Club for the occupation of the association.
The bench refused to entertain these prayers by saying "such directions cannot be issued on the judicial side."
However, the court left the issue open to be considered by the Supreme Court on its administrative side to take appropriate decision bearing in mind the needs of the present and future and also after consultations with all stakeholders. The Court has granted liberty to the SCBA, Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association and the Bar Council of India to make representations in this issue.
While reserving judgment in the case on March 17, the bench had expressed its disinclination towards considering the issue on the judicial side. CJI DY Chandrachud had said–
"Lawyers are a part of us. It's a part of our institution. If we use our judicial orders, it's a message- look what is the Supreme Court doing. You're taking judicial powers and using it for your expansion. Today it is land, tomorrow it will be something else."
During a hearing of the case before the former CJI UU Lalit last November, Attorney General for India R Venkataramani had agreed to hold discussions with the concerned Ministries on the issue of lawyers' needs.
Spat between CJI and SCBA President over the listing of the petition
Certain heated up exchanges have occurred in the past between the Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and SCBA President Senior Advocate Vikas Singh over the non-listing of the case.
Singh once write a letter to CJI DY Chandrachud for hearing the matter urgently saying it pertained to the "lives and livelihoods" of the SCBA members. Through the letter, Senior Advocate Vikas Singh had said that SCBA might be forced to resort to protesting if the matter is not heard urgently.
Three weeks ago, there occurred a spat between the CJI and Singh, when the latter raised his voice while protesting that the matter has not been listed despite it being mentioned on several occasions. The interaction ended on a dramatic note, with the CJI asking Singh to leave the Court.
Later, a section of lawyers proposed that the Supreme Court Bar Association should move a resolution to express solidarity with Singh on this issue and also to reprimand Senior Advocates Kapil Sibal and Neeraj Kishan Kaul for apologising to the CJI for Singh's outbursts. This move to reprimand Sibal and Kaul was opposed by several other lawyers including former Attorney General KK Venugopal. Last week, the Singh announced the decision of the SCBA Executive Committee to call off the meeting which was scheduled to discuss the proposed resolutions.
Case Title: SCBA v. Ministry of Urban Development And Ors. WP(C)No. 640/2022
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 236
Constitution of India - Article 32 - Plea of Supreme Court Bar Association for conversion of plot allotted to the Court as lawyers' chambers cannot be entertained on the judicial side-However, matter left open to be considered on the administrative side.