CJI steps in amid rare SC Bench dispute, will hear Delhi tree felling case today

The case relates to the felling of trees for widening the approach road to the Central Armed Police Forces Institute of Medical Sciences (CAPFIMS) in Southwest Delhi’s Ridge area.

On April 24, a two-judge bench of Justices Gavai and Sandeep Mehta had issued notice to DDA Vice-Chairman Subhasish Panda on the issue.

In May, another bench of Justices Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan also issued notice to Panda on a plea alleging contempt in the matter. In subsequent hearings, Justice Oka said there was a “cover-up” on what transpired during Delhi Lieutenant Governor V K Saxena’s visit to the site in February and sought to know if it was the L-G who had directed the felling of the trees.

On July 24, Senior Advocate Vikas Singh, appearing for Panda, told the bench led by Justice Gavai that the road, which would also facilitate access to the CBI’s residential quarters and SAARC University, was only 7.5 metres wide and needed to be widened to 24 metres. He said the inauguration of the CAPFIMS Hospital, on which Rs 2,200 crore was spent, was scheduled for April, but was deferred due to the road-widening issue. He also referred to the April 24 contempt notice issued by the Justice Oka bench.

Taking note, Justice Gavai wondered how the other bench could have heard the contempt plea when it had already issued notice in the matter on April 24. “The appropriate course for any bench would have been to refer the matter to the Chief Justice and get the order as to which bench should hear it because, ultimately, it is the Chief Justice who is the master of the roster,” he remarked.

On being told by the amicus curiae that the contempt proceedings before Justice Oka’s bench “have substantially travelled”, Justice Gavai’s bench said it wanted to avoid conflicting orders by different benches in the same matter and would therefore keep the contempt plea before it in abeyance.

“We are of the considered view that the continuation of the contempt proceedings for the same cause of action would not be in consonance with judicial propriety and interest of justice. We, therefore, direct that the contempt proceedings initiated by the bench presided by… Justice Gavai, vide order dated April 24, 2024, are kept in abeyance,” the Justice Gavai bench said, referring the matter to the CJI for clarification.