Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna on Monday recused himself from listening to a petition alleging contempt in opposition to Delhi lieutenant governor (L-G) VK Saxena in his capability because the chairperson of the Delhi Improvement Authority (DDA), citing a previous affiliation with him throughout a go to to Bihar jails. The contempt case pertains to unlawful tree felling in Delhi’s Ridge space.
Heading a bench that additionally included justice PV Sanjay Kumar, the CJI stated: “After I was NALSA (nationwide authorized companies authority) chairman, I had gone to Patna, and with the Delhi L-G, I toured jails there. So, it is not going to be applicable for me to listen to a writ in his private capability.” The courtroom directed the matter to be listed earlier than one other bench for additional proceedings.
With CJI Khanna’s recusal, the case will now be heard by a fifth bench in simply 4 months, highlighting its complicated trajectory. This contempt petition has already seen a uncommon confrontation between two Supreme Courtroom benches earlier this yr, compelling the then CJI, justice Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, to intervene to resolve the standoff and centralise the matter underneath his personal bench in August.
The controversy started in July when two completely different benches, led by justices Bhushan R Gavai and AS Oka respectively, dealt with separate however associated features of the contempt case, resulting in a judicial standoff. Justice Gavai’s bench raised considerations over judicial propriety, questioning whether or not justice Oka’s bench ought to have entertained the matter whereas an identical challenge was pending earlier than the three-judge forest bench led by justice Gavai. Recognising the potential for conflicting orders, justice Chandrachud stepped in as CJI, centralising the matter underneath his bench, which heard the case final on November 8, the final day in workplace for the then CJI. The matter then adopted the identical bench and was listed earlier than the brand new CJI, who has now stated that or not it’s positioned earlier than a special bench – the fifth to listen to the case.
The contempt petition, filed by Delhi resident Bindu Kapurea, alleges that DDA felled 1,670 bushes within the Satbari ridge space of South Delhi in February with out the obligatory permission of the Supreme Courtroom. The bushes had been lower to make means for a highway widening venture connecting the CAPFIMS multi-specialty hospital in Chhatarpur.
In March, the courtroom rejected DDA’s utility looking for retrospective approval for the felling. Subsequent inquiries revealed that the bushes had already been lower a month earlier, prompting the petitioner to accuse DDA of flouting courtroom orders. The case additionally sought to carry senior DDA officers, together with the L-G as its chairperson, accountable for the breach.
Throughout earlier hearings, DDA tried to shift accountability onto lower-level engineers – a stand frowned on by the courtroom. The courtroom subsequently sought affidavits from L-G Saxena, the DDA chairperson, and former vice-chairperson Subhashish Panda to make clear whether or not they had been conscious of the obligatory courtroom permission and after they realized concerning the unauthorized tree felling.
In his defence, L-G Saxena submitted affidavits citing his lack of know-how concerning the tree-felling incident till a lot later. He said that he grew to become conscious of the courtroom’s requirement for prior approval on March 21 and was knowledgeable in June that the bushes had been felled in February.
This timeline was corroborated by the previous DDA vice-chairperson Subhashish Panda, who claimed in his affidavit that he verbally knowledgeable the L-G concerning the incident throughout an April 12 assembly however didn’t disclose the precise timing of the felling till June.
Kapurea, represented by senior counsel Gopal Sankaranarayanan and advocate Manan Verma, nonetheless, challenged these claims, stating references within the June 10 letter from the DDA vice-chairperson that implied Saxena had been knowledgeable as early as April concerning the unauthorised felling.
The petitioner additionally cited a examine carried out by the Forest Survey of India (FSI) revealed that 1,670 bushes had been lower, far exceeding preliminary claims by the DDA and the Delhi authorities, which estimated the numbers at 642 and 745, respectively.
The Supreme Courtroom’s prior hearings focussed on the ecological injury attributable to DDA’s actions, even because it proposed remedial measures, together with replanting the felled bushes inside the ridge and planting a further 100 saplings for each tree lower. It additionally instructed appointing environmental specialists to observe the replantation and make sure the saplings’ survival.
Through the two hearings of this matter earlier this month, DDA, showing by senior counsel Maninder Singh and Vikas Singh, sought permission to proceed the highway venture, arguing that the multi-specialty hospital it connects is awaiting inauguration and serves a significant public function. Nevertheless, the bench, led by former CJI Chandrachud, declined to entertain such reduction inside the contempt proceedings, emphasising the necessity to deal with accountability and systemic safeguards to stop future violations.
