The Supreme Court on Thursday decided against transferring the proceedings concerning the Satya Niketan building collapse to itself, asking the Delhi High Court to continue monitoring the matter as 'things have started moving.' A bench of Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and R Mahadevan said it did not want to disturb the proceedings already underway before the high court and asked it to monitor the action being taken by civic authorities and bring the case to a conclusion.

The Satya Niketan building collapse, near Moti Bagh, had left seven people dead and 12 injured. The incident subsequently led to a series of proceedings concerning building safety and enforcement by civic authorities in Delhi. The Supreme Court took note of steps being taken by the Delhi government and the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) pursuant to its earlier directions concerning building collapses and fires in Delhi and Lucknow.

Amicus Curiae Ajit Kumar submitted that the exercise being undertaken by the authorities was moving in the right direction. He, however, stressed that the proceedings before the Delhi High Court should not be restricted only to the safety of paying guest accommodations and hostels. Kumar told the Supreme Court that inspections had been carried out in four areas of Delhi as well as in Lucknow. The earlier directions covered Lajpat Nagar, Saket, Malviya Nagar and Sarojini Nagar in Delhi, and Ali Ganj in Luck, no response from authorities provided.

The bench accepted Kumar's suggestion that the High Court proceedings continue while a report is filed before the Supreme Court in terms of its March 25, 2026 order, particularly paragraphs 6 and 7, and its August 5, 2026 order. The clarification came after the Supreme Court had earlier indicated that it could examine the broader issue of commercial exploitation of areas designated as residential across Delhi-NCR.

The court's latest direction means the Delhi High Court will continue to oversee the ongoing proceedings and monitor the action taken by civic authorities in the wake of the building collapse. The exact nature of the inspections and the measures being taken to ensure building safety remain unclear. The Supreme Court did not specify any additional steps beyond the existing monitoring process.

The incident has raised concerns about building safety and enforcement in Delhi. The Delhi High Court had issued several directions following the incident, including asking the MCD to undertake an exercise to assess the safety of PG accommodations and hostels. The court's decision to leave the case in the hands of the Delhi High Court reflects a preference for local oversight in the wake of the collapse.

The case highlights the ongoing challenges in ensuring compliance with building safety regulations in Delhi. While the Supreme Court has acknowledged the progress made, the lack of detailed information on the current status of inspections and enforcement actions leaves key questions unanswered. The absence of a clear timeline for the completion of the monitoring process also remains a point of uncertainty. The court's decision underscores the need for continued vigilance and transparency in addressing the safety concerns raised by the collapse.