Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant(s) Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR Mr. Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, A.S.G. Mrs. Alka Agrawal, Adv. Mr. Apoorva Kurup, Adv. Mr. Navanajay Mahapatra, Adv. Mr. Madhav Sinhal, Adv. Mr. Mayank Pandey, Adv. Ms. Sansriti Pathak, Adv. Mr. Santosh Ramdurg, Adv. Mr. Yogesh Vats, Adv. Mr. Shreekant Neelappa Terdal, AOR
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Basavaprabhu Patil, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sanjay Hegde, Sr. Adv. Mr. Vikram Hegde, Adv. Ms. Hima Lawrence, AOR Ms. Chinmayi Shrivastava, Adv. Mr. Trishan Dollny, Adv. Mr. Ankit Tiwari, Adv. Mr. Arijit Sukla, Adv. Mr. Ashish, Adv. Mr. Tanay Hegde, Adv. Mr. Roy Abraham, Adv. Ms. Reena Roy, Adv. Mr. Adithya Koshy Roy, Adv. Mr. Akhil Abraham Roy, Adv. Mr. Saraswata Mohapatra, Adv. Mr. Himinder Lal, AOR Mr. Basavaprabhu Patil, Sr. Adv. Mr. T. Raja, Sr. Adv. Mr. Vikram Hegde, AOR Ms. Hima Lawrence, Adv. Ms. Chinmayi Shrivastava, Adv. Mr. M.t. Arunan, Adv. Mr. Trishan Dollny, Adv. Mr. M.A. Aruneshe, Adv. Mr. Arijit Sukla, Adv. Mr. Prateek K. Chadha, AOR Mr. Sreekar Aechuri, Adv. Mr. Aniket Chauhaan, Adv. Mr. Shashank, Adv. Mr. Shantanu Lakhotia, Adv. Mr. Divyaveer Singh, Adv. Mr. Harsh Parashar, AOR Mr. A.sirajudeen, Adv. Dr. N. Visakamurthy, AOR Mr. Vardhman Kaushik, AOR Mr. Arindam Sarin, Adv. Mr. Mayank Sharma, Adv. Mr. Dhruv Joshi, Adv. Mr. Vinay Kaushik, Adv. Mrs. P. S. Vijayadharni, Adv. Mr. Nishant Gautam, Adv. Mr. Varinder Kumar Sharma, AOR Mr. Sanjay Singh Thakur, Adv. Mr. Hitesh Kumar Sharma, Adv. Mr. Vijay Prtap Singh, Adv. Mr. Akhileshwar Jha, Adv. Ms. Shreya Jha, Adv. Mr. Anupam Kumar, Adv. Ms. Manju Jetley, AOR Mr. Vibhav Mishra, Adv. Ms. Megha Gaur, Adv. Mr. Parmanand Gaur, AOR Mr. Abhikalp Pratap Singh, AOR Mr. Ashish Batra, AOR Mr. Siddhartha Jha, AOR Mr. Basavaprabhu Patil, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sanjay Hegde, Sr. Adv. Mr. Vikram Hegde, Adv. Ms. Hima Lawrence, AOR Ms. Chinmayi Shrivastava, Adv. Mr. Trishan Dollny, Adv. Mr. Ankit Tiwari, Adv. Mr. Arijit Sukla, Adv. Mr. Ashish, Adv. Mr. Tanay Hegde, Adv. Mr. Prateek K. Chadha, AOR Mr. Basavaprabhu Patil, Sr. Adv. Mr. Shantanu Lakhotia, Adv. Mr. Divyaveer Singh, Adv. Mr. T. Raja, Sr. Adv. Mr. Vikram Hegde, AOR Ms. Hima Lawrence, Adv. Ms. Chinmayi Shrivastava, Adv. Mr. M.T. Arunan, Adv. Mr. Trishan Dollny, Adv. Mr. M.A. Aruneshe, Adv. Mr. Arijit Sukla, Adv. Mr. Anuroop Chakravarti, Adv. Mr. M.S.vishnu Sankar, Adv. Mr. Prakhar Srivastava, Adv. Ms. Athira G. Nair, Adv. Mr. Aditya Santhosh, Adv. Ms. Dimple Nagpal, Adv. For M/s Lawfic, AOR

The doctrine of merger is mentioned in the section where the court discusses the finality of its judgment and the binding effect of its decision. Specifically, it is referenced in the context of the appellate process and the binding nature of the judgment upon subsequent proceedings. The court indicates that upon dismissal of the appeals, the principles laid down in the judgment will merge with the orders of subordinate courts or tribunals, thereby binding them to apply the ratio of the Supreme Court's decision. This is articulated in the context of ensuring consistency and finality in the application of the legal principles established by the court.

The relevant mention appears in the part where the court discusses the implications of the dismissal of the civil appeals and the application of the doctrine of merger to the subordinate fora, emphasizing that the subordinate authorities would be bound to follow the ratio of the court’s judgment.

[Reference: p_59]