Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Online)(SC) 11781

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE, CJ, HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.V. ANJARIA, J, HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE, J
ASHOK KUMAR SHARMA, INDIAN FOREST SERVICE (RETD) – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 1164/2023

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Prashanto Chandra Sen, Sr. Adv., Mr. Kaushik Choudhury, AOR, Ms. Shibani Ghosh, Adv., Ms. Rashi Goswami, Adv., Mr. Saksham Garg, Adv., Mr. Jyotirmoy Chatterjee, Adv.
For the Respondents: Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, A.S.G., Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker, AOR, Ms. Ruchi Kohli, Adv., Ms. Bani Dixit, Adv., Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv., Mr. Sridhar Pottaraju, Adv., Mr. Kanu Agarwal, Adv., Mr. Rohan Gupta, Adv., Mr. Nishe Rajen Shonker, AOR, Mrs. Anu K Joy, Adv., Mr. Alim Anvar, Adv.

The court emphasized procedural compliance and the necessity of expert reviews in administrative processes.

Headnote:(A) Relevant provisions concerning administrative procedure and compliance with regulatory guidelines apply. Directives regarding the State of Uttar Pradesh's application were issued, requesting examination by the CEC. (Paras 1-4)

(B) Court administrative efficiency and procedural compliance are emphasized, underscoring the importance of timely submissions to ensure the effective operation of judicial review.

(C) The case raises issues of jurisdiction and procedural adherence, particularly concerning the authority and recommendations of expert bodies like the CEC.

Findings of Court:
The court directed the applicant to provide documentation for CEC review, illustrating the court's role in ensuring appropriate procedural steps.

Issues: The court addressed the procedure of filing applications and the role of the CEC in assessing the application's merits.

Ratio Decidendi: By directing the CEC's review, the court reaffirmed the need for adherence to proper procedures in public interest matters to facilitate timely and efficient judicial outcomes.

Result: The matter is to be revisited on the specified future date.

Table of Content
1. court determined procedural steps for ongoing review. (Para 1)
2. directives ensure timely examination by regulatory authorities. (Para 2 , 3)
3. future listing indicates next steps in the judicial process. (Para 4)

Date : 29-08-2025 This matter was called on for hearing today.

CORAM :

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.V. ANJARIA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE For Petitioner(s) :

Mr. Prashanto Chandra Sen, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Kaushik Choudhury, AOR Ms. Shibani Ghosh, Adv. Ms. Rashi Goswami, Adv.

Mr. Saksham Garg, Adv.

Mr. Jyotirmoy Chatterjee, Adv.

For Respondent(s) :

Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, A.S.G.

Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker, AOR Ms. Ruchi Kohli, Adv.

Ms. Bani Dixit, Adv. Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv.

Mr. Sridhar Pottaraju, Adv.

Mr. Kanu Agarwal, Adv.

Mr. Rohan Gupta, Adv.

Mr. Nishe Rajen Shonker, AOR Mrs. Anu K Joy, Adv. Mr. Alim Anvar, Adv.

Signa ture No t Ve rifi ed Mr. Santhosh K, Adv.

Digita lly s ign ed b y Mrs. Devika A.l., Adv.

POOJA SHARMA Date: 2025.08.29

16:48: 17 IST Reason:

Applicant-in-person, AOR Mr. Naveen Kumar, AOR Mr. Aditya Goyal, Adv.

Ms. Isha Baloni, Adv.

Mr. Utkarsh Chandra, Adv.

Mr. Sudhanshu Pathak, Adv.

Mr. Rishabh Chaudhary, Adv. Ms. Sunanda Chaudhary, Adv.

Ms. Nidhi Singh, Adv.

Mr. Anantha Narayana M.g., AOR Mr. Atul Shankar Vinod, AOR Mr. Tejaswi Kumar Pradhan, AOR Mr. Pranab Samantray, Adv.

Mr. Manoranjan Paikaray, Adv.

Mr. K M Natraj, A.S.G.

Mr. Sharan Dev Singh Thakur, Sr. A.A.G.

Mr. Sudeep Kumar, AOR Ms. Indira Bhakar, Adv.

Ms. Manisha, Adv.

Ms. Rupali, Adv.

Mr. Shadan Farasat, Sr. Adv.

Ms. Varsha Sharma, Adv.

Mr. Yash S. Vijay, AOR Mr. Shikhar Aggarwal, Adv.

Mr. Kunal Chatterji, AOR Ms. Maitrayee Banerjee, Adv.

Mr. Rohit Bansal, Adv.

Mr. Varij Nayan Mishra, Adv.

Mr. Aravindh S., AOR Mr. Aman Gautam, Adv.

Ms. Anika Bansal, Adv.

Ms. Mrinal Gopal Elker, AOR Ms. Chhavi Khandelwal, Adv.

Mr. Adarsh Dubey, Adv.

Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv.

Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR Mr. Shrirang B. Varma, Adv.

Ms. Shagun Srivastava, Adv.

Mr. Ashwin Arun Hirulkar, Adv.

Ms. Rashmi Nandakumar, AOR Mr. Abhishek Atrey, AOR Dr. Abhishek Atrey, Adv.

Ms. Ishita Bist, Adv.

Ms. Ambika Atrey, Adv.

Mr. Navneet Gupta, Adv.

UPON hearing the counsel, the Court made the following

O R D E R

IA Nos. 101749/2025, 89433/2025 & 89434/2025:

1. We find that it will be appropriate that the application filed by the State of Uttar Pradesh (IA No.

89434/2025) is considered by the CEC.

2. We, therefore, direct the applicant to furnish a copy of the application to the Member Secretary, CEC, who is requested to examine the issue and submit a report to this Court within four weeks from today.

3. Non-applicants are at liberty to file reply, if any, within four weeks.

4. List this writ petition on 08.10.2025, high up on the Board along with the aforesaid applications.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2025 Supreme(Online)(SC) 11781

SUPREME COURT OF INDIAHON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE, CJ, HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.V. ANJARIA, J, HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE, JASHOK KUMAR SHARMA, INDIAN FOREST SERVICE (RETD) – AppellantVersusUNION OF INDIA – RespondentWRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 1164/2023

The court emphasized procedural compliance and the necessity of expert reviews in administrative processes.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE, CJ, HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.V. ANJARIA, J, HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE, J
ASHOK KUMAR SHARMA, INDIAN FOREST SERVICE (RETD) – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 1164/2023