The Supreme Court of India.
Credit: PTI Photo
New Delhi: A three-judge Supreme Court bench on Wednesday objected to another bench headed by Justice Abhay S Oka going ahead with contempt proceedings against the Delhi Development Authority over the felling of trees on a road in the ridge area in South West Delhi.
Justice B R Gavai, presiding over the bench, said when his bench was already seized of the matter, Justice Oka led bench “has not adhered to judicial propriety”.
The bench, also comprising Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and K V Viswanathan, asked, when for the same cause of action for felling of trees, this court had issued notice, could the other bench have proceeded for that.
"Though the other bench has not adhered to judicial propriety, we are doing so," the bench said, referring the matter to the Chief Justice of India to decide which bench should continue to hear the case related to the ridge area so as to avoid further conflicting orders.
In the situation, Justice Gavai, who is in line to become the CJI on superannuation of Justice Sanjiv Khanna in May 2025, said “The appropriate course for any bench would have been to refer the matter to the Chief Justice and get the order as to which bench should hear because ultimately, it is the CJI who is, the master of the roster”.
The bench led by Justice Gavai also noted the bench presided over by Justice Oka had gone ahead with the contempt proceedings in May this year even though his bench had taken it up in April, 2024.
Senior advocate Vikas Singh, appearing for the DDA Vice-Chairman, submitted that the approach road, which would also facilitate access to the residential societies for CBI employees, paramilitary forces, and SAARC University, was only 7.5 m wide and needed to be widened to 24 m.
The DDA said that Rs 2,200 crore had already been spent on the institute and on the non-availability of the road, it cannot be made functional. The inauguration of the institute which was slated to take place in April had been deferred against the backdrop of a legal tussle over the widening of the road.
He also submitted that the institute in the ridge area was established after favourable conclusions from the apex court-appointed Central Empowered Committee (CEC) and the court itself.
"We don’t want any conflicting orders because atleast we believe in judicial propriety,” Justice Gavai said, suggesting Singh to approach the CJI for further direction.
Singh said the contempt proceedings can go on before the Justice Oka led bench but in the process, this national interest project should not be lost.
As the amicus curiae submitted that the contempt proceedings before the Justice Oka led bench have substantially moved ahead, the bench led by Justice Gavai preferred to keep the contempt proceedings initiated by it in abeyance.
The court noted, "It would have been more appropriate for the other bench to seek clarification from the Chief Justice of India before initiating the contempt proceedings for the same cause of action as to which bench should continue with the same proceedings”.