Supreme Court held- SCBA cannot convert 1.33 acres entirely into lawyer’s chambers
Today, while hearing the Supreme Court Bar Association vs Ministry of Urban Development matter where a writ of mandamus was sought by petitioners; the bench stated that Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) cannot claim a right over the entirety of 1.33 acres of land for converting it into a lawyer’s chamber. The matter was presented before the Supreme Court bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice PS Narasimha, and Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul. During the hearing, SCBA urged that a direction for the change of land use has to be adjudicated only on the judicial side which was not a correct perception. Moreover, the bench stated that issues pertaining to the change of land use, as indicated in the letter, were eminently suitable for being addressed on the administrative side. The Supreme Court of India discharges both judicial and administrative functions which implicates diverse stakeholders including lawyers, litigants, and the staff engaged in activities of the top Court.
The bench highlighted that “the Supreme Court, therefore, are unable to subscribe to the reliefs which have been sought in the petition under Article 32.” In addition, the matter was left open to the Supreme Court of India on its administrative side to take appropriate decisions bearing in mind the needs of the institution for the present and the future and the interest of all stakeholders. It also added that “These are matters which cannot be resolved by application of judicial standards and have to be taken on the administrative side of the Supreme Court.” Moreover, the process of decision-making would also involve consultation with the Bar. Also, the bench stated that “SCAORA, SCBA, and BCI would be at liberty to address the issue with their representations on the administrative side.”
Also Read: Legal Articles
On March 17, 2023, the bench expressed its unwillingness regarding the issue on the judicial side and stated that “Lawyers are a part of us. It’s a part of our institution. If we use our judicial order, it’s a message- look what is the Supreme Court doing. You’re taking judicial powers and using it for your expansion. Today it is land, tomorrow it will be something else.” In the past, there were various heated arguments between the CJI and SCBA President over the non-listing of the case.
In this case, the SCBA invoked the jurisdiction of the top Court under Article 32 of the Constitution seeking a writ of mandamus directing the Union Ministry of Urban Development to grant permission for the conversion into a chamber block for lawyers of an entire tract of land admeasuring 1.33 acres situated near the ITO, which has been allotted to the Supreme Court. To convert the entire area into ‘a Supreme Court Complex’ so that all the buildings across the Supreme Court including the Foreign Correspondents’ Club of South Asia, Indian Law Institute, and Indian Society of International Law could be utilized for conversion into chambers, for activities of the Supreme Court or for any other amenities for lawyers. Moreover, SCBA highlighted that “a government bungalow which is presently being occupied by the Foreign Correspondents’ Club to the petitioner.”
According to the petitioner, an area admeasuring 12.19 acres in the erstwhile Appu Ghar Complex was allotted to the Supreme Court by the Ministry of Urban Development. A small portion of the same was to be utilized for the construction of a new chamber block for advocates practicing before the Supreme Court. In addition, the archives of the Supreme Court can be housed in the Additional Building Complex where some areas were vacant. The petitioner submitted that “they have an equal right to utilize vacant spaces in lands allotted to the Supreme Court as its members are an integral part of the justice delivery system.” As a result, the Supreme Court of India disposed of the present appeal.
Also Read: Supreme Court Updates
