[Lawyer's Chambers] SC says it cant' issue judicial orders to convert land allotted by govt for chamber blocks

Read Time: 04 minutes


The Supreme Court has reserved its orders in the matter while saying that it needed time to reflect on the issue.

The Supreme Court today observed that it could not pass judicial orders directing to convert land that was allotted to the Supreme Court, into chamber blocks for lawyers.

A CJI Chandrachud led bench however clarified that it would be willing to take up the issue on the administrative side and have talks with the government.

"Lawyers are a part of this institution, but can we use our judicial powers for our own people...for our own needs..we cannot send a signal to the government that we can bulldoze their authority..", the bench opined.

This observation was made after Senior Advocate Vikas Singh submitted before the bench that for Delhi High Court, many private buildings were taken over.

"As Supreme Court is surrounded by roads on all sides, we can grow only within the campus.. we need to plan futuristically. Please issue notice so that discussion can start..", Singh has also told the bench.

Singh had further expressed his reservations to the suggestion of considering the case on the administrative side, stating that the Bar and other stakeholders will not be a part of such administrative consultation.

A bench also consisting of Justices SK Kaul and Narasimha was further told by Senior Advocate Meenakshi Arora, appearing on behalf of SCAORA that AORs were also in need of chambers and that there was a requirement for AORs to have their office within 6kms from the Court.

"At present 800 AORs are there who require chambers..", she said.

When the Court asked Attorney General for India R. Venkataramani for his input, he expressed his inclination towards taking up the issue on administrative side.

"The flexibility of administrative side may be beneficial in the matter, on the judicial side, I may lose the capacity to be a neutral mediator", the AG said.

Case Title: SCBA vs. Ministry of Urban Development