The bench, headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, also urged lawyers that, instead of pressing for a judicial solution, the Bar must trust that the top court will take up the issue with the government on the administrative side.
The judiciary using its powers to secure allotment of land for lawyers’ chambers sends a very wrong message, said the Supreme Court on Friday as it reserved orders on a petition filed by Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) over an issue that has witnessed its share of controversies over the past two weeks.
Senior advocate Vikas Singh, who is also the president of SCBA, told the court that his only concern was that the issue should not take a back seat as the purpose of filing the petition was to start an engagement with the Centre. (PTI)
The bench, headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, also urged lawyers that, instead of pressing for a judicial solution, the Bar must trust that the top court will take up the issue with the government on the administrative side.
“Lawyers are part of our institution. Should we use judicial orders to protect our community? It sends a very wrong message that judiciary is using its powers to take over land. Today it is land, tomorrow it will be something else. It must not be felt that the court is using its judicial powers to bulldoze its way,” said the bench, also comprising justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and PS Narasimha.
The bench, however, agreed that the issue raised by SCBA was a genuine one. “It is not that we are not concerned. You must trust us to take it with the government on the administrative side. This is an old tradition that exists in judiciary that we engage with the government. Our needs are expanding and we can convince them to consider our demands,” CJI Chandachud said.
The court was assisted by in the matter by attorney general (AG) R Venkatramani, who agreed with the bench. “The flexibility of the administrative process has a certain advantage. In court I may lose, but on the administrative side, discussions can go a long way,” he said.
Senior advocate Vikas Singh, who is also the president of SCBA, told the court that his only concern was that the issue should not take a back seat as the purpose of filing the petition was to start an engagement with the Centre.
The bench told Singh: “The government takes our requirements on administrative side very carefully. The judiciary was given ₹7,000 crore without a single rupee cut because they (Centre) realised it was the need of the hour. These are matters on which we must constantly engage with the government.”
Acrimony on the issue between Bar and Bench appeared to come out in the open earlier his month.
On March 2, Singh appeared before a bench headed by CJI Chandrachud and complained about the matter not being heard despite getting mentioned on several occasions. Objecting to the harsh tone used by Singh, who said at one point that lawyers may start protesting outside the homes of judges, the CJI asked Singh to keep his voice down and warned him that he would “not be cowed down” by such conduct.
Senior advocates Kapil Sibal and Neeraj Kishan Kaul, who were present in the court, apologised to the CJI for the exchange. Later that day, SCBA members moved a resolution seeking apology from the two senior lawyers for “trying to dilute the efforts of the Executive Committee led by president”, and called for an EC meeting on March 16 to pass a resolution against them.
Former attorney general KK Venugopal intervened in the matter through a letter to Singh on Tuesday, saying that the apology offered by the two senior lawyers was to “maintain cordial relationship” between the bench and the Bar. “I sincerely request you not to allow these two resolutions so that this event may not explode into a situation where there may be two camps with enmity between the members inter se, which may not be conducive to the peace and well being of the SCBA,” Venugopal said in the letter.
It was then that SCBA cancelled the general body meeting and decided to back away from reprimanding the two senior advocates
SCBA’s petition before the top court, filed in August 2022, seeks a direction to the Union urban development ministry to allot 1.33 acres of land (earlier occupied by Appu Ghar) to the Supreme Court to be used for chamber blocks for lawyers.
After the hearing on Friday, SCBA issued a note thanking the CJI for taking up the case for hearing and reserving orders. “After waiting for 70 years, this is a significant victory for the Bar and a step forward in ensuring better facilities for lawyers who have been tirelessly serving the legal system of the country,” the note added.
Along with SCBA, other lawyer bodies such as SC Advocates-on-Record Association and the Bar Council of India, too, pitched in with their demands for increased space. The bench assured them that it will consider all stakeholders while taking up the matter at the appropriate level.
Source Link
