Land allotment for lawyers: SC says ‘can’t bulldoze government authority by judicial orders’

The three-judge Supreme Court bench said that the court must be trusted to take it up on the administrative side with the government

The three-judge Supreme Court bench said that the court must be trusted to take it up on the administrative side with the government
The three-judge Supreme Court bench said that the court must be trusted to take it up on the administrative side with the government

SC to take up the issue with govt on taking over buildings for expanding premises

On Friday, the Supreme Court said it will take up the land allotment for lawyers‘ chambers issue with the government. It was hearing a plea that the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) moved to convert 1.33-acre land allotted to the apex court for the construction of lawyers’ chambers.

The three-judge bench, headed by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud and comprising Justices S K Kaul and P S Narasimha said it would take up the land allotment issue for lawyers’ chambers with the government.

The bench queried senior advocate and SCBA president Vikas Singh, how could the court pass an order to take over the land for allotment of chambers? Lawyers are part of us, but can we use our judicial powers to safeguard our people? The bench added it would appear that the apex court is exercising its own judicial powers to meet its own needs.

Singh said the apex court is surrounded by roads on all sides, there is no way to grow except within the campus, and futuristic planning is required for the court campus and urged the court to issue notice on the plea so that a discussion can start. It was pointed out that a building close to the court has received eviction orders, and they have got another land.

The bench asked how it could take over all the buildings judicially, and added that the court did not doubt the requirement of the lawyers, but under Article 32, how can it take over these buildings? “We must trust the court to take it up on the administrative side with the government. A signal must not go to the government that we can bulldoze their authority by passing judicial orders”, said the bench.

Singh pressed for issuing notice in the matter and added that the Delhi High Court expansion land was taken over. The bench replied that it was done administratively. Expressing his reservation, Singh said the bar and other stakeholders would not be a part of such administrative consultation.

The bench further added that for the e-courts project, the government allotted Rs.7,000 crore because they said that we need it, and the government engages with the top court on the administrative side and the lawyers’ chambers issue can be put to it.

Thanking the bench on behalf of the entire bar, Singh said that the entire bar is with the institution and “we will not do anything to undermine the majesty of the institution irrespective of whatever happens in this case”.

Counsel for the Bar Council of India contended that there is a need for space for the bar body and also Supreme Court Advocate on Record Association (SCAORA) sought to be a part of the proceedings and intervene in the issue.

Attorney General R Venkataramani submitted that flexibility of the administrative side would certainly be helpful to resolve the matter.

The apex court reserved its order after hearing the submissions.

[With Inputs from IANS]

PGurus is now on Telegram. Click here to join our channel and stay updated with all the latest news and views

For all the latest updates, download PGurus App.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here