1. Matter concerning executive government functions — Suitability for judicial debate or Law Commission report. (Para 1 )
Back
Next 
2022 Supreme(SC) 1730
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Abhay S. Oka, JJ.
Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay – Appellant
Versus
Ministry of Health And Family Welfare & Anr. – Respondents
SLP (Civil) No. 27597 of 2019 with W.P.(C) No. 431 of 2021 W.P.(C) No. 681 of 2021, W.P.(C) No. 736 of 2021 and W.P.(C) No. 480 of 2022
Decided On : 18-11-2022
Important Points
The issue falls under the purview of the executive government and is not a subject matter for the Law Commission or the court to debate on.
Subject
Administrative Law - Jurisdiction and Powers of Executive
Headnote
Executive Government - Subject Matter - The court held that the issue at hand falls under the purview of the executive government and is not a subject matter for the Law Commission or the court to debate on.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner seeks to withdraw the petition, and the court dismisses the special leave petition as withdrawn. Subsequently, other connected petitions are also dismissed as withdrawn.
Finding of the Court:
The court dismisses the petitions in view of the withdrawal of the special leave petition and the order passed in the connected matters.
Issues:
Ratio Decidendi: The issue at hand is within the jurisdiction of the executive government and is not for the Law Commission or the court to address.
Final Decision: The special leave petition and connected petitions are dismissed.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Advocates appeared:
Mr. Ashwini Kumar Upadyay, in Person, Mr. Ashwani Kumar Dubey, Advocate, Mr. Aman Sinha, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Atulesh Kumar, Advocate, Mr. Raman Kumar Bharti, Advocate, Mr.Aman Sinha, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Ashwini K Upadhyay, Advocate, Mr. Ashutosh Dubey, Advocate, Mr. Abhishek Chauhan, Advocate, Mr. Amit P Shahi, Advocate, Mr. Amit Kumar, Advocate, Mr. Gaurav Yadav, Advocate, Mr. Ashutosh Dubey, Advocate, Mr. Sanjai Kumar Pathak, Advocate, Mr. Arvind Kumar Tripathi, Advocate, Mrs. Shashi Pathak, Advocate, For the Appellant / Mr. Tushar Mehta, Ld. S.G., Mr. K.M. Nataraj, Ld. ASG, Mr. Shailesh Madiyal, Advocate, Mr. Digvijay Dam, Advocate, Mr. Kanu Agrawal, Advocate, Mr. Nakul Chengappa K.K. Advocate, Ms. Akriti A Manubarwala, Advocate, Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker, Advocate, Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, Advocate, Mr.Vivek Narayan Sharma, Advocate, Ms. Mahima Bhardwaj, Advocate, Mr. Laksha Bharnani, Advocate, Mr. Pranshu Kaushal, Advocate, Mr. Adhiraj Wadhera, Advocate, Mr. Abhinav Raghav, Advocate, For the Respondent.
Mr. Ashwini Kumar Upadyay, in Person, Mr. Ashwani Kumar Dubey, Advocate, Mr. Aman Sinha, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Atulesh Kumar, Advocate, Mr. Raman Kumar Bharti, Advocate, Mr.Aman Sinha, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Ashwini K Upadhyay, Advocate, Mr. Ashutosh Dubey, Advocate, Mr. Abhishek Chauhan, Advocate, Mr. Amit P Shahi, Advocate, Mr. Amit Kumar, Advocate, Mr. Gaurav Yadav, Advocate, Mr. Ashutosh Dubey, Advocate, Mr. Sanjai Kumar Pathak, Advocate, Mr. Arvind Kumar Tripathi, Advocate, Mrs. Shashi Pathak, Advocate, For the Appellant / Mr. Tushar Mehta, Ld. S.G., Mr. K.M. Nataraj, Ld. ASG, Mr. Shailesh Madiyal, Advocate, Mr. Digvijay Dam, Advocate, Mr. Kanu Agrawal, Advocate, Mr. Nakul Chengappa K.K. Advocate, Ms. Akriti A Manubarwala, Advocate, Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker, Advocate, Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, Advocate, Mr.Vivek Narayan Sharma, Advocate, Ms. Mahima Bhardwaj, Advocate, Mr. Laksha Bharnani, Advocate, Mr. Pranshu Kaushal, Advocate, Mr. Adhiraj Wadhera, Advocate, Mr. Abhinav Raghav, Advocate, For the Respondent.
Table of Contents
2. Petitioner's request for withdrawal of the petition. (Para 2 )
3. Issues emanating from the executive government are for the government to address, not for Law Commission reports or judicial debate. (Para 1 )
4. Matters within the domain of the executive government are not subject to judicial debate or Law Commission reports. (Para 1 )
5. Special leave petition and connected writ petitions dismissed as withdrawn or dismissed. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 )
6. Are executive government matters suitable for judicial debate or Law Commission reports?
No, the court held that problems emanating from the executive government of the day must be addressed by the government and cannot be the subject of a Law Commission report or a debate before the court. (Para 1 )
ORDER
SLP(C) No. 27597/2019
1. The problem is emanating from something which the executive Government of the day has to look into. This cannot be a subject matter of report by a Law Commission or a debate before this Court.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner at this stage seeks to withdraw this petition.
3. The special leave petition is dismissed as withdrawn.
W.P.(C) No. 431/2021
W.P.(C) No. 681/2021
W.P.(C) No. 736/2021
4. In view of the order passed in the special leave petition(Civil) No. 27597/2019, these petitions are also dismissed as withdrawn.
W.P.(C) No. 480/2022
5. In view of the order passed above, (SLP (Civil) No. 27597/2019 and connected matters), the writ petition is dismissed.
