Today, On 25th July, A Supreme Court Bench led by Justice BR Gavai criticized Justice AS Oka’s Bench for hearing the DDA tree felling case. Justice Gavai emphasized the importance of judicial propriety, remarking that the other Bench had not followed it.
New Delhi: A Supreme Court Bench led by Justice BR Gavai expressed dissatisfaction regarding the ongoing case related to tree-cutting in the Delhi Ridge forest area, involving the Delhi Development Authority under the direction of Delhi Lieutenant Governor VK Saxena, being heard by another Bench of the Court.
The three-judge Bench, consisting of Justices BR Gavai, Prashant Kumar Mishra, and KV Viswanathan, decided to refer the matter to the Chief Justice of India (CJI) for proper listing before a single Bench.
Justice Gavai remarked,
“We are adhering to judicial propriety, although the other bench has not. For the same cause of action in a contempt matter, it should ideally have referred the issue to the Chief Justice.”
A Division Bench comprising Justices Abhay Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan has been hearing a suo motu contempt case against Subhasish Panda, the Vice-Chairman of the Delhi Development Authority (DDA).
The DDA faced scrutiny for cutting down over a hundred trees in the Delhi Ridge Forest, an act that violated court orders.
The case recently garnered attention when Justice Oka‘s bench strongly criticized attempts to obscure the involvement of the Delhi Lieutenant Governor (LG) in the tree-cutting incident.
The Division Bench had also demanded an explanation from the DDA, questioning whether the trees were cut on the LG’s orders or if the decision was made independently.
However, the three-judge Bench led by Justice Gavai has raised questions about the Division Bench’s actions.
The Bench Stated,
“It would have been more appropriate for the other bench to seek clarification from the Honourable CJI before initiating contempt for the same cause of action as observed hereinabove,”
This observation came as the three-judge Bench was addressing an application by the DDA seeking permission to cut down some trees to widen a road leading to the Central Armed Police Forces Institute of Medical Sciences in Delhi, an exclusive hospital planned for the paramilitary forces.
Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, representing the petitioners who filed the contempt petitions, argued that the Division Bench’s actions were not improper since there were separate applications.
Justice Gavai responded,
“I have been hearing it for two years. We do not understand the resistance in placing it before the CJI. We are not allowing (cutting) or hearing on merits. Recording of arguments is not our findings.”
Sankaranarayanan further noted that a road to the hospital area already exists and questioned the DDA’s intentions regarding the project.
The senior lawyer stated,
“It does not concern me which Bench hears it only concerned with the orders. They (DDA) said they will withdraw the project. See the air pollution in this city and they are cutting trees left right centre. Any Bench will act,”
Justice Gavai assured,
“You are not the only nature-lover here. I have also passed (pro-ecology) orders in Pench (national park) etc. We only want judicial propriety. We are not touchy about any matter.”
The three-judge Bench then referred the matter to CJI DY Chandrachud to ensure it is heard by one Bench, thus preventing conflicting orders.
The Court ordered,
“There are various proceedings pending before the two benches. In order to avoid conflicting orders, it is appropriate that matters of Ridge area are heard by the same bench. To avoid further conflicting orders, we find it appropriate that for the matters regarding Delhi Ridge, the Registrar to obtain necessary instructions and clarifications,”
Senior Advocate Vikas Singh represented the DDA, while advocate K Parameshwar served as the Amicus Curiae before the Justice Gavai-led Bench.