Supreme Court Administration Demands Former Chief Justice Vacate Official Residence
In a July 1 letter addressed to the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs, the Supreme Court has demanded the immediate vacation of Bungalow No. 5 on Krishna Menon Marg, which serves as the designated residence for India's sitting Chief Justice. The communication emphasizes that Justice Chandrachud has exceeded both the specifically granted permission period and the statutory six-month limit outlined in the 2022 Rules.
Justice Chandrachud, who held the position of 50th Chief Justice from November 2022 to November 2024, continues to reside in the Type VIII bungalow nearly eight months after stepping down from office. The situation has been complicated by the fact that both his successors, Justices Sanjiv Khanna and current CJI Bhushan R Gavai, have chosen to remain in their previously allocated residences rather than move into the official CJI accommodation.
The timeline of permissions reveals a series of extensions that have now been exhausted. Initially, Justice Chandrachud sought permission in December 2024 to remain in the Krishna Menon Marg residence until April 30, 2025, citing renovation delays at his alternative accommodation on Tughlak Road due to pollution-related construction restrictions. This request was approved by the then CJI and subsequently sanctioned by the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs for a monthly license fee of ₹5,430.
Following this initial extension, Justice Chandrachud made an oral request to extend his stay until May 31, 2025, which was granted with the explicit condition that no further extensions would be permitted. The administration's letter notes that this final deadline has also lapsed, prompting the formal intervention.
The regulatory framework governing such accommodations is clear: Rule 3B of the Supreme Court Judges (Amendment) Rules, 2022, allows retired Chief Justices to retain Type VII accommodation for a maximum of six months post-retirement. Justice Chandrachud's entitlement under this rule expired on May 10, 2025, yet he continues to occupy the superior Type VIII residence.
When approached for comment, Justice Chandrachud explained that the delay stems from compelling personal circumstances that have been communicated to the Supreme Court administration. He revealed that he has already been allocated alternative government accommodation on rent, but the property requires extensive renovation after being vacant for approximately two years.
The former Chief Justice also disclosed deeply personal reasons for the extended timeline, relating to his family's special circumstances. He has two daughters with severe medical conditions, including nemaline myopathy, who require specialized care and treatment at AIIMS. These special needs have necessitated careful consideration in selecting appropriate housing that can accommodate their requirements.
Justice Chandrachud emphasized his understanding of the responsibilities associated with his former office and assured that the matter would be resolved within days. He referenced historical precedents where former Chief Justices have been granted extended accommodation periods to facilitate transitions or address personal emergencies.
The formal letter from the Supreme Court administration represents an unprecedented intervention to reclaim the highest judicial residence from a former occupant. While informal extensions and grace periods are not uncommon in judicial and bureaucratic circles, such formal action seeking urgent government intervention is virtually unheard of at this level.
The situation highlights the practical challenges that can arise when personal circumstances intersect with official protocols, particularly in cases involving family members with special needs. It also underscores the administrative complexities surrounding high-profile government accommodations and the delicate balance between compassionate considerations and regulatory compliance.
As the matter moves toward resolution, it serves as a reminder of the various pressures and responsibilities that continue to affect former holders of constitutional offices, even after their tenure has concluded.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
42 minutes ago
- Time of India
Historian Bharali passes away at 78
Guwahati: Professor Udayaditya Bharali, a distinguished historian, academician and political commentator, passed away on Sunday at the age of 78 at his South Sarania residence in Guwahati after battling kidney disease for a long time. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now CM Himanta Biswa Sarma expressed sorrow at the passing of the notable educationist. "HCM conveyed his heartfelt condolences to the bereaved family and offered prayers for the eternal peace of the departed soul," Assam CMO wrote on X. Bharali, who was on dialysis for the last few years, is survived by his wife and two daughters. His last rites will be performed on Monday. A prominent figure in the state's Naxal movement during the 1970s, Bharali was an academician, columnist, and sports organiser, who later became the principal of Cotton College (now Cotton University). Following his death, condolences poured in from several political parties, including BJP, Congress, AGP, AIUDF, CPI, CPM, AJP, and Raijor Dal, alongside social organisations and academia. He was consistently outspoken during political crises, including being a prominent voice against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act. Bharali's close associate Devabrata Sharma, a scholar and former principal of Jorhat College (Amalgamated), noted his significant contribution to democratising Assam's civil society. "A comrade-in-arms with Vaskar Nandy, the legendary Naxalite leader, Bharali was instrumental in formulating the line of PCC, CPIML on the vexed nationality question of Assam during the eventful days of the Assam movement," Sharma added.
News18
an hour ago
- News18
Opposition Moves SC Over Bihar Voter List Revision; EC Says No Rule Change Amid Row Over Ad
Last Updated: INDIA bloc parties have been opposing the provision whereby voters whose names were included in the electoral roll after 2003 are required to submit birth documents Opposition parties have intensified their criticism of the special intensive revision of electoral rolls in poll-bound Bihar, with TMC MP Mahua Moitra and RJD's Manoj Jha moving the Supreme Court seeking to quash the EC order claiming that it violated the Constitution. Besides Moitra and Jha, several NGOs have also petitioned the court against the special intensive revision (SIR), even as the Election Commission (EC) issued a statement on Sunday saying it has not changed its instructions on the revision process. This came after several social media posts, including one by Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge, cited an advertisement by the EC published in newspapers to suggest that showing documents is not necessary. The Congress and other INDIA bloc parties have been opposing the provision whereby voters whose names were included in the electoral roll after 2003 are required to submit documents related to birth. 'Why are people who have been voting in election after election being asked to show their documents for voting ?" Kharge said in a post on X. 'When the pressure from the opposition, the public and civil society increased, the Election Commission hurriedly published these advertisements today, which state that now only a form needs to be filled and showing documents is not necessary." WHAT DID THE EC SAY? In a statement, the EC made it clear that while voters were required to 'submit their documents anytime before July 25, 2025", those who failed to do so would get an opportunity 'during the Claims & Objections period also". The poll body also urged people to 'beware of statements being made by a few persons, who without reading the SIR order dated 24 June 2025… are attempting to confuse the public with their incorrect and misleading statements". WHAT DID THE PETITIONERS SAY? Moitra, who moved the SC seeking quashing of the June 24 EC order under which special intensive revision (SIR) is being conducted, alleged that it violates several provisions of the Constitution and the Representation of People (RP) Act, 1950. In her plea, she submitted that if not set aside, it can lead to large-scale disenfranchisement of eligible voters in the country, thereby undermining democracy and free and fair elections. 'The present writ petition has been filed in public interest under Article 32 of the Constitution seeking setting aside of order dated 24.06.2025 issued by Election Commission of India under which SIR of electoral rolls in Bihar is being conducted in violation of Articles 14, 19(1)(a), 21, 325, 328 of the Constitution and provisions of Representation of People (RP) Act, 1950 and Registration of Electors (RER) Rules, 1960…," her plea stated. Moitra sought a direction from the apex court to restrain the EC from issuing similar orders for SIR of electoral rolls in other states. 'They have now introduced it to deprive the bonafide young electorate of Bihar, where elections are slated to be held shortly. Later, they will target Bengal, where elections are due in 2026," Moitra told news agency PTI. Jha, meanwhile, alleged in his plea that the EC order violated Articles 14, 21, 325 and 326 of the Constitution of India. He stated that the impugned order 'is a tool of institutionalised disenfranchisement and it is being used to justify aggressive and opaque revisions of electoral rolls that disproportionately target Muslim, Dalit and poor migrant communities, as such, they are not random patterns but it is engineered exclusions". A similar plea has also been filed by the NGO, Association of Democratic Reforms, through advocate Prashant Bhushan. Several other civil society organisations like PUCL and activists like Yogendra Yadav have approached the top court against the EC's direction. While the opposition has been questioning the timing and intent of the exercise, the BJP has defended it. Leader of Opposition in the West Bengal assembly Suvendu Adhikari, however, welcomed the SIR and said such an exercise should also be conducted in the TMC-ruled state. The last such revision in Bihar was conducted in 2003. According to the EC, the exercise was necessitated by rapid urbanisation, frequent migration, young citizens becoming eligible to vote, non-reporting of deaths, and inclusion of the names of foreign illegal immigrants. top videos View all The EC said it will scrupulously adhere to the constitutional and legal provisions as laid down in Article 326 of the Constitution and Section 16 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, in carrying out the revision. (With PTI inputs) First Published: July 06, 2025, 23:20 IST
Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
Studying in mother tongue helps in better understanding, build strong values that remain for life: CJI Gavai
Chief Justice of India, Justice Bhushan R Gavai, while addressing a felicitation function at his old school at Girgaon in south Mumbai on Sunday said that studying in one's mother tongue helps in understanding the subjects better and build strong values that stay with you for rest of the life. He said that studying in Marathi kept him grounded. Justice Gavai on Sunday morning visited classrooms at Chikitsak Samuh Shirodkar School in Girgaon where he undertook his primary and secondary education besides the municipal school in Amravati and another school in Colaba in Mumbai. He also interacted with his old classmates. CJI Gavai, while addressing a gathering of his old school friends, teachers and students, said his mother would give him 20 paisa and he would catch a BEST bus to school every day. Born on November 24, 1960, Justice Gavai took over as CJI on May 14 and will retire on November 23, this year. He expressed gratitude towards his teachers of the school where he studied between 1969 and 1973, when his father R S Gavai was Member of Legislative Council (MLC) and observed that surroundings near the school situated in 'real Aaamchi (our) Mumbai' have not yet changed and 'chawls' and 'Marathi Sanskruti (culture)' still prevailed. Justice Gavai said he was confused whether to speak in Marathi or English. 'Should I speak in Marathi? Will everyone understand? Alright. It's going on in Maharashtra right now…' he said and continued the rest of the speech in Marathi. The issue of Marathi pride has presently taken centre stage in Maharashtra politics with the state government withdrawing three-language policy decisions. Justice Gavai said that during the school days, he was interested in debates and the physical training class imparted discipline in students. 'Studying in Marathi medium was not a handicap, it kept me grounded. This school and my teachers have played a significant role in whatever position I have reached today and the education and values I received gave direction to my life. My journey in public speaking began on this stage. I gained confidence through elocution competitions and cultural programmes. I am what I am today because of these opportunities. I studied in Marathi medium. Studying in one's mother tongue helps in better understanding of the subjects and also instils strong values and they remain with you for life,' CJI Gavai said. Minister for Skill Development and Guardian Minister for Mumbai suburban district Mangal Prabhat Lodha, Justice Madhav J Jamdar of the Bombay High Court and Chikistak Samuh president Kishor Rangnekar, secretary Gurunath Pandit and Headmistress Sanchita Gawde were among others present at the event.
