CJI Sanjiv Khanna Recuses From Hearing Contempt Case Against DDA Over Tree Felling, Says Happened To Meet Delhi LG At NALSA Event

When the matter came up for hearing before the bench of CJI Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar, the CJI verbally remarked:

"As a Chairman of NALSA, I went to a Bihar jail. The LG of Delhi was also there. We had taken a tour of the jail and this contempt petition is in his personal capacity - it may be appropriate to list it before another bench."

Lieutenant Governor(LG) of Delhi, VK Saxena, is the ex-officio Chairperson of the DDA.

The bench directed that the matter be relisted before a bench in which either of the present judges was not part.

Earlier, the bench comprising former Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra was hearing the contempt case initiated against the DDA Vice Chairman for the felling of the trees in Delhi's ridge without obtaining the mandatory permission from the Supreme Court. On September 16, the Court had asked the DDA Chairperson (Delhi LG) to file a personal affidavit on various aspects.

On October 20, the LG filed an affidavit stating, among other things, that he was not informed of the need to get the Court's permission before the trees were cut. The LG also denied giving any specific information on February 3, when he visited the site, to cut the trees.

On the last hearing, the bench led by former CJI Justice Chandrachud observed that there was a discrepancy between the statements of the Chairperson of the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) and the Vice Chairperson of the DDA regarding the date on which the former was informed about the illegal felling of the trees in the Delhi's ridge forest.

The Court noted that as per the affidavit filed by the DDA Chairperson, who happens to be the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi VK Saxena, the information about the illegal tree felling was conveyed to him on June 10 by the DDA Vice Chairperson. However, as per another letter issued by the DDA VC, the information about the tree felling was conveyed to the LG on April 12.

The matter will now be heard in the week commencing December 2.

Background

The matter was heard on several days in June-July by a bench comprising Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan, during which the DDA and its Vice Chairman had to face several tough questions from the bench. During the hearings, the bench had observed that the materials indicated the role of Delhi Lieutenant Governor V K Saxena, who happens to be Chairman of the DDA, in ordering the tree felling in Delhi's ridge forest. The bench also minced no words in pulling up the DDA for "cover-ups". At the last hearing on July 12, the bench had warned that it would issue contempt notice to the LG and posted the matter for further hearing on July 31.

Meanwhile, on July 24, another bench led by Justice BR Gavai, took objection to Justice Oka's bench taking up the contempt petition. Justice Gavai observed that his bench had issued notice to the DDA on a contempt petition (filed by another petitioner) with respect to the same tree felling much before Justice Oka's bench initiated the proceedings. The bench led by Justice Gavai, noticing the parallel proceedings, referred the matter to the Chief Justice of India and opined that all matters pertaining to the Delhi ridge forest be dealt with by one single bench.

After this order of Justice Gavai's bench, the matter was not listed before Justice Oka's bench on the scheduled date of July 31. The matter was then shifted to the bench led by former CJI DY Chandrachud comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Mishra

The felling of trees was done for the road widening project from Main Chhattarpur Road to SAARC Chowk, Gaushala Road Row and from SAARC Chowk to CAPFIMS (Hospital) Row.

Following the directions issued by Justice Oka's bench on July 12, Chief Secretary of the Government of the National Capital Territory of Delhi, Naresh Kumar, filed an affidavit stating that LG VK Saxena was not made aware of the necessity to obtain the court's permission for felling trees in the southern Ridge.

During the hearings before Justice Oka, the petitioner in the contempt case complained of harassment by the Delhi police, following which the Court made a stern observation that no authority should harass the petitioner.

Case Details: Bindu Kapurea v. Subhasish Panda Dairy No. 21171-2024, In Re Subhasish Panda Vice Chairman DDA SMC(Crl) No. 2/2024