Supreme Court – Daily Orders
In Re : T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad vs Union Of India on 12 February, 2026
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (C) NO.202 OF 1995
IN RE : T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPAD PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. RESPONDENT(S)
O R D E R
Item 1 – In Re: Kulwant Singh & Ors.
IA Nos. 1409 of 2026, 1413 of 2026 and 1416 of 2026
1. These applications have been moved by some small farmers/
agriculturists and landowners of different villages in District
Una, Himachal Pradesh. The necessity to file these applications
has arisen on account of an order passed by the High Court of
Himachal Pradesh on 05.12.2025 in CWP No.9100 of 2025, which has
been filed by the present applicants. That writ petition pertains
to the grant of permission to fell Khair and other trees on their
lands, for which they had applied to the Divisional Forest Officer.
That request having been declined, they approached the High Court.
2. The instant applications have been filed to seek clarification
of the order dated 12.12.1996 passed by this Court in the instant
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
NITIN TALREJA
Date: 2026.02.19
17:13:00 IST
writ petition, whereby a ban has been imposed on, inter alia, the
Reason:
1
felling of Khair trees in the State of Himachal Pradesh,
notwithstanding whether it is a private or a public notified
forest.
3. It seems that the parties before the High Court failed to
bring two subsequent decisions of this Court to the notice of the
High Court.
4. Vide judgement dated 16.02.2018 passed in I.A. No.3840/2014
filed by the State of Himachal Pradesh, this Court, keeping in view
the recommendations made by the Central Empowered Committee (CEC),
permitted conditional felling of Khair trees in the following
terms:
“9. … we reiterate that the State shall be bound
by all the conditions laid down by the CEC including
the condition that no compartment of more than 20
hectares shall be felled at one go. In addition to
the conditions laid down by the CEC, the following
conditions shall be strictly complied with by the
State of Himachal Pradesh:
1. The felling should be done directly by the
Forest Department or by the Himachal Pradesh
State Forest Corporation and the work of
felling should not be handed over or given on
contract to any private agency;
2. The Forest Department should ensure that
videography of each beat where felling is to
be done, is done separately at regular
intervals to clearly indicate the condition
and state of the forest before felling, during
felling and after felling;
3. As far as Khair trees are concerned, the
State shall ensure that at least 25% of mature
Khair trees are retained as mother trees and
these should be marked and numbered as trees
not to be felled, which should be clearly
reflected in the videography. The trees to be
felled can be marked by a separate colour. The
number, size and girth of the trees should be
clearly spelt out;
4. As far as Chil Pine and Sal trees are
concerned, the State shall ensure that at
least 40 mature trees are retained per hectare2
and the other conditions will be the same as
applicable to Khair trees;
5. In addition to the conditions laid down in
the Working Plan and those laid down by the
CEC, the State of Himachal Pradesh shall
ensure that adequate funds are made available
and re-afforestation is done either
simultaneously or if it is not possible,
immediately after felling is complete in each
block of 20 hectares.
6. It should also be ensured that these forest
areas are kept free from grazing and are
protected;
7. The State should also ensure that
sufficient number of healthy saplings are
planted so that there is proper regeneration
of the forest.
8. This entire programme of experimental
silviculture felling shall be done under the
supervision and guidance of a two-Member
Committee headed by Shri V.P. Mohan, IFS
(Retd.), former Principal Chief Conservator of
Forests, Himachal Pradesh. The second member
of this Committee shall be nominated by the
Vice Chancellor, Dr. Y.S. Parmar University of
Horticulture and Forestry, Nauni, Solan,
Himachal Pradesh. The second Member shall be a
Professor of Silviculture.”
[Emphasis Supplied]
5. Subsequently, I.A. No.87648/2020 was filed by the State of
Himachal Pradesh, seeking approval of Working Plans for felling of
Khair trees. Thereafter, the State also filed I.A. No.
132905/2022, wherein blanket permission to fell Khair trees on
private land was sought, which would be achieved by moving the same
to the list of excluded species under the Himachal Pradesh Land
Preservation Act, 1978. Both these applications were disposed of by
this Court vide order dated 10.05.2023. This Court refrained from
granting any blanket permission to indiscriminately fell Khair
trees on private land. However, the cutting of Khair trees as per
the Working Plan was approved, and the State was granted liberty to
3
prepare a plan for the regulation of Khair tree cultivation with
compensatory measures, and to file an application thereafter. The
relevant portion of the order dated 10.05.2023 is reproduced below:
“IA.NO.87648/2020 (Item no.1)
1. This is an application filed by the State of
Himachal Pradesh with the following prayer clause
(a):-
“(a) Allow the State of Himachal Pradesh to
carry out silviculture felling of Khair
(Acacia catechu) trees in the forests areas of
the State in accordance with the approved
Working Plans;”
2. The CEC has examined the issue at hand and filed
its Report No.15/2023 dated 14.03.2023. The CEC has
approved the working plan, as prepared by the State of
Himachal Pradesh.
3. In that view of the matter, we are inclined to
allow the application.
4. The permission is granted subject to the State
Government complying with all the conditions
recommended in the Report of the CEC. The application
is, accordingly, allowed in terms of prayer clause
(a).
IA.132905/2022 (Item no.1)
1. By way of this application the State of Himachal
Pradesh seeks permission to remove Khair trees from
private land and put the said species in the list of
exempted species under Himachal Pradesh Land
Preservation Act, 1978.
2. Learned Amicus Curiae has reservations about such a
blanket exemption.
3. Learned Advocate General for the State of Himachal
Pradesh states that the Khair tree is a specialized
nature of tree which grows for a period of six years,
even after cutting the trunk.
4. He, therefore, submits that taking into
consideration the nature of the species, the request
made on behalf of State of Himachal Pradesh is
reasonable.
5. However, on suggestion of the Court, the learned
Advocate General states that the State is willing to
re-examine the said issue so that instead of blanket
exemption been allowed for felling of the said trees,
a plan could be worked out, wherein felling of the
said trees could be regulated with certain
compensatory measures.
4
6. Learned Advocate General states that the said
exercise would require a period of about eight weeks.
7. As such, the said I.A. stands disposed of with
liberty to the State Government to file a fresh
application after the plans are finalized.”
[Emphasis supplied]
6. It may, thus, be seen on a cumulative reading of the orders
dated 16.02.2018 and 10.05.2023 that: (i) This Court has already
granted permission for the removal of dry, fallen, fungus infected
diseased and rotten Khair trees standing on the private land
through paragraphs 3 and 4 of the order dated 16.02.2018, although
subject to the conditions mentioned therein; (ii) so long as the
State Forest Department and the Himachal Pradesh State Forest
Development Corporation, as well as the land owners, are willing to
comply with the conditions imposed by this Court, there is no
impediment for the removal of Khair trees of the nature mentioned
in clause (ii) of the prayer in I.A. No. 1413/2026, and no separate
permission is, thus, required to be granted; (iii) however, the
prayer made by the State of Himachal Pradesh to accord permission
for en bloc removal/felling of Khair trees from private land has
not been accepted by this Court, though a proper plan for that
purpose has been permitted to be prepared and thereafter be
presented to this Court for approval. The instant applications,
therefore, stand disposed of in the above terms, with the
clarification that this may not be considered as permission for en
bloc removal of Khair trees from private lands.
7. Learned amicus curiae has informed us that such like
applications are being filed repeatedly by the landowners/farmers
of Himachal Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir, Ladakh, and other hilly
5
areas.
8. Since repeated applications are being filed by the affected
persons in these States and Union Territories, we direct the
respective State Governments/Union Territory Administration to
constitute Committees on the lines of paragraph 9(8.) of the order
dated 16.02.2018 and submit a compliance report within two weeks,
along with proposals to implement appropriate regulations in this
regard.
Item 2 – In Re: Mohit Kumar
IA Nos 324676 of 2025, 324677 of 2025 & 334531 of 2025
9. These applications have been filed seeking certain directions,
which are purportedly in public interest. The averments made
therein are vague and evasive, and having heard learned counsel for
the applicant and perused the material placed on record, we are of
the considered opinion that no effective directions can be issued
based upon such cryptic averments. There is no necessity for us to
make any further comment on the matter except to say that general
directions to regulate wood-based industries have already been
comprehensively issued by this Court vide order dated 05.10.2015.
We dispose of these applications with liberty to the applicant to
approach the jurisdictional High Courts by way of proper petitions,
not being contempt petitions, and seek redressal of his grievances.
We request the Hon’ble Chief Justices of the High Courts to place
such petition(s) before the respective Environment Benches.
10. The Registry is, further, directed not to entertain any
6
application with respect to the alleged non-compliance of the order
dated 05.10.2015 regarding regulation of wood-based industries.
Item 3 – In Re: Dr. R.P Balwan, IFS (Retd.) & Ors
IA Nos.244339 of 2025 and 244340 of 2025, CEC Report No.05/2026
11. Let these applications be listed along with Suo-Motu Writ
Petition (Civil) No.10 of 2025 on 26.02.2026.
Item 4 – In Re: Rajaji Tigar Reserve, Uttarakhand
Contempt Petition(C) No.319/2021, CEC Report No.01/2024, IA No.
66719/2021, IA No.140286/2023, IA No.197410/2023, IA No.197412/2023
Item 4(a) – CEC Report No.30/2022, IA No.52187/2023, IA
No.197351/2024, IA No.2665/2024, CEC Report No.28/2024, IA
No.271988/2025, IA No.336381/2025, IA No.25296/2026 in W.P. (C)
No.202/1995
12. This Contempt Petition and other applications pertain to
upgradation of the 11 km long Laldhang–Chillarkhal Road, which lies
in the buffer zone for Rajaji Tiger Reserve, Uttarakhand. This
Court, vide order dated 11.01.2023, had imposed an interim stay
from any work being conducted on the said road. IA No.271988/2025
has been moved by the State of Uttarakhand, praying for vacation of
the said interim order and consequential permission to continue
road-work. IA No.336381/2025 and IA No.25296/2026 have been filed
by private persons seeking a similar prayer.
13. The total stretch of road measures approximately 11.5 km, out
of which, the controversy that survives is with respect to the
central stretch of 4.7 km from Chamaria bend to Sigadi Sot. It
seems that the State Government had initially proposed to construct
this road not only with the objective of providing access to the
7
connecting villages, but also for its commercial utilisation, as is
revealed from the proposal to allow plying of 150 heavy vehicles
comprising dumpers, trucks, and other commercial vehicles. The
issue, however, need not detain us for long.
14. The expert bodies, namely, (i) the Standing Committee of the
National Board for Wildlife; (ii) the National Tiger Conservation
Authority; and (iii) the Ministry of Environment, Forest, and
Climate Change, Union of India; and (iv) the Central Empowered
Committee constituted by this Court, respectively, have examined
the proposal(s). We have gone through their reports and
recommendations.
15. Although, the State Government initially filed a counter
affidavit opposing some of the recommendations made by the expert
bodies, we do not find any merit in the objections submitted by the
State Government against the restrictions recommended to be imposed
by different expert bodies. Learned counsel/senior counsel
representing the State has also fairly conceded that the
recommendations of the expert bodies shall be strictly adhered to.
16. Consequently, permission is granted to the State Government to
undertake works on the subject road for the purpose of providing
better access and facilities, including basic amenities, to the
residents of the villages located in remote areas, who were sought
to be connected through this road.
17. While perusing the reports and recommendations of the expert
bodies, it has come to our attention that the proposal of the State
Government for permitting 150 commercial vehicles per day to ply on
8
the renovated road has been accepted by the CEC, despite the fact
of availability of an alternative road for commercial vehicles
being on record. Learned State counsel also, during the course of
hearing, fairly acknowledges that an alternative road is available
for plying commercial vehicles, though the alternate route would be
longer than the subject road.
18. Keeping in mind our duty to protect forest ecology in the
Tiger Reserve buffer zone and balancing the interests of the local
residents of the various beneficiary villages connected through
this road, we deem it appropriate to direct that no commercial
vehicle shall be permitted to ply on the subject road, and such
vehicles shall instead operate only from the alternative road
available for them.
19. The measures that will be taken to prevent the use of the road
by commercial vehicles will be placed on record before this Court,
with an advance copy circulated to the CEC. The CEC will examine
such measures in consultation with the learned amicus curiae and
place its report before this Court.
20. Subject to the conditions hereinabove, the interlocutory
applications are partly allowed. The Contempt Petition, along with
pending interlocutory applications, if any, also stands disposed
of.
Item No.5 – In Re: Debadityo Sinha
IA No.185063/2025, IA No.185065/202, IA No.185066/2025, IA
No.275143/2025
9
21. Learned senior counsel for the project proponent seeks and is
granted two weeks’ time to file the reply to the application(s).
Similarly, counter affidavits shall also be filed by the State of
Uttar Pradesh.
22. Post on 23.02.2026 at 2 p.m.
ITEM NO.6
Contempt Petition(C) No.938/2021 in C.A. Nos.12234-12235/2018
23. This contempt petition has been initiated by the Goa
Foundation alleging, inter alia, the breach and violation of order
dated 04.02.2015, which this Court had passed in C.A. Nos.12234-
12235/2015. That order reads as follows:
“Treat this appeal as an Interlocutory Application in
Writ Petition (C) No.202 of 1995, T.N. Godavarman
Thirumulpad Vs. Union of India & Ors., and list it
before the Green Bench on 27.02.2015.
In the meanwhile, we direct that the respondents herein
will not issue any ‘No Objection Certificate(s)’ for the
conversion of any plot that has natural vegetation with
tree canopy density in excess of 0.1 and an area above
one hectare.”
24. It is a matter of fact that no prior permission from this
Court was obtained before the felling of 2670 trees. It is in this
factual backdrop that, on 14.02.2024 and again on 17.05.2024, when
this contempt petition came up for hearing, a fair and candid stand
was taken on behalf of the State of Goa that the trees had been
felled without prior permission of this Court. Accordingly, details
of the remedial measures undertaken by the State and the project
proponent were sought. This Court also took notice of the fact that
the project had been shifted to another site, and the land which
10
was originally allocated for the project was now available for
compensatory afforestation. It was directed that replantation
activity be initiated on the original site without delay, apart
from the compensatory afforestation already in progress on a
separate plot admeasuring 12.5 hectares. A sum of Rs. 22 crores was
recorded to have been deposited with the Compensatory Afforestation
Fund Management and Planning Authority (“CAMPA”) as part of the
CAMPA fund. The matter was taken up thereafter from time to time.
25. Meanwhile, two reports have been sent by the Executive
Committee of the CAMPA for the State of Goa regarding the
inspection of 17.23 hectares of compensatory afforestation
plantation, raised in Sandod village, Collem range, North Goa and
the re-verification of replantation carried out by the project
proponent at Codar, Usgao, Sangod, Colvale, Navelim, and Surla
villages, respectively.
26. On the first issue, the CAMPA has made certain observations
regarding the area of plantation and the manner of plantation
carried out. The report concluded that the compensatory plantation
on 17.23 hectares in Sangod village has been successfully carried
out by the Department in a methodical and scientific manner.
27. In the context of the second issue, namely, the verification
of replantation, the CAMPA Executive Committee visited the site on
24.09.2024 and 28.09.2024 to verify the plantation carried out by
the project proponent in the above-mentioned villages. The
Committee, upon inspection, found that a total of 9,119 saplings
were found to be surviving at various sites, indicating an average
11
survival rate of 73.46%.
28. To fill this gap, i.e., for casualty replacement, it has been
recommended that the user agency/project proponent be directed to
make fresh plantation during every monsoon season for at least 5
years, starting from 2024-2025, to meet the deficit caused by the
approximate 27% mortality rate.
29. The Committee has further noted that the plantation site in
Colvale is right below a high-tension transmission line. At such
locations, it is suggested that suitable species of dwarf/shorter
varieties, as per the Union Ministry’s recommendations, be planted.
A further recommendation has been made for watering the plants
through drip irrigation systems.
30. As per the report, the casualty replacement needs to be
carried out in a time-bound manner by the user agency/project
proponent, at its own cost, to ensure survival of the plants. The
maintenance of all plantation sites shall also be carried out by
the user agency at its own expense for the next five years,
commencing in 2024-2025.
31. We have considered the arguments made by learned senior
counsel/counsel for the parties, including, most importantly, the
submissions forwarded by the learned amicus curiae.
32. In light of the recommendations made by the CAMPA Executive
Committee and in continuation of the orders passed by this Court
from time to time, we deem it appropriate to dispose of this
Contempt Proceeding, at this stage, with the following directions:
(i) The user agency, namely, M/s. Goa Tamnar Transmission
12
Project Limited will ensure that fresh plantation in lieu of the27% casualty is undertaken, strictly in accordance with the
recommendations made by the CAMPA Executive Committee. This action
of casualty replacement may be done in/after every monsoon, as per
the scheme of plantation approved by CAMPA;
(ii) The entire expenditure of 27% casualty replacement, for
the watering of the entire plantation, and also for other
miscellaneous expenses incurred to ensure that all the plants
remain healthy, shall be borne by the user agency. Any objection,
delay, or reluctance shown by the user agency towards meeting such
costs shall be deemed to be grounds for revival of the instant
contempt proceedings against its functionaries;
(iii) The CAMPA is directed to formulate a plan for ensuring
the healthy growth of the saplings that have survived
(approximately 73% of the total plantation). While the user agency
was to bear the cost for maintenance of the saplings only till
2024-25, in light of the facts of the instant case, the user agency
is directed to bear the expenditure incurred to maintain these
plants for the period of another five years, namely, till 2029-30;
(iv) The fresh replacement saplings planted to address the 27%
casualty, as well as those which are planted for subsequent
casualty replacement, shall also be maintained for a period of 10
years from the date of plantation at the cost of the user agency;
and
(v) The CAMPA shall act as the Monitoring-cum-Supervisory
Authority to ensure that eventually there is zero mortality and all
the plants duly survive and grow. If, for any unforeseen
13
circumstances, any requirement for the treatment of the saplings,
fire prevention during the dry season, or any other requirement
arises, all such arrangements shall also be made by the user
agency.
33. Ordered accordingly.
34. In the event of any non-cooperation or refusal to comply with
the directions issued herein, the contempt petitioner, the CAMPA,
or the State/Union of India shall be at liberty to seek appropriate
directions.
……………………..CJI.
(SURYA KANT)
……………………….J.
(JOYMALYA BAGCHI)
……………………….J.
(VIPUL M. PANCHOLI)
NEW DELHI;
FEBRUARY 12, 2026
14
ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.1 SECTION PIL-W
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 202/1995
IN RE : T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPAD Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s)
(INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION FOR 12.02.2026 “ONLY” [1] I.A. NOS. 1409
OF 2026 [Application for Impleadment as party Respondents on behalf
of ‘Kulwant Singh & Ors.’ filed by Ms. Anisha Upadhyay, Advocate]
WITH I.A. NOS. 1413 & 1416 OF 2026 [Applications for Directions and
Exemption from filing O.T. on behalf of ‘Kulwant Singh & Ors.’
filed by Ms. Anisha Upadhyay, Advocate]] IN RE : KULWANT SINGH &
ORS. AND [2] I.A. Nos. 324676 & 324677 OF 2025 [Applications for
Directions and Exemption from filing O.T. on behalf of ‘Mohit
Kumar’ filed by Mr. Ajit Sharma, Advocate] WITH I.A. NO. 334531 OF
2025 [Applications for Impleadment as party Petitioner filed on
behalf of ‘Mohit Kumar’ filed by Mr. Ajit Sharma, Advocate] IN RE :
MOHIT KUMAR AND [3] IN RE: ARAVALLI ZOO SAFARI PROJECT, HARYANA I.
A. NOS. 244339 & 244340 OF 2025 [Applications for Intervention &
Directions filed by Ms. Shibani Ghosh, Advocate] WITH I. A. NO.
321305 OF 20225 (Application for permission to file Additional
Affidavit filed by Mr. Akshay Amritanshu, Advocate for the State of
Haryana) IN RE: DR. R.P. BALWAN, IFS (RETD.) & ORS. AND [4] IN RE :
RAJAJI TIGER RESERVE, UTTARAKHAND CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 319
OF 2021 IN I. A. NO. 90182 OF 2019 (DISPOSED OF) (Application for
Directions) WITH I. A. NO. 66719 OF 2021 (Application for Exemption
from filing Notorized Affidavit) AND I. A. NO. 140286 OF 2023
(Application for Condonation of delay in filing Counter Affidavit)
WITH I. A. NOS. 197410 AND 197412 OF 2023 (Applications for
permission to file Additional documents and Exemption from filing
O.T.) AND [4(a)] I. A. NO. 186910 OF 2022 (CEC Report No. 30 of
2022 – Report of CEC in Appln. No. 1557/2022 filed before it by
Gaurav Kumar Bansal) WITH I.A. NO. 52187 OF 2023 (Application for
Exemption from filing O.T.) WITH I.A. NOS. 197351 OF 2023 AND 2665
OF 2024 (Applications for permission to file Affidavit) WITH I. A.
NO. 283720 OF 20224 (CEC Report No. 28 of 2024 – Report of CEC in
I.A. No. 186910/2022) WITH I. A. NO. 271988 OF 20225 (Application
on behalf of ‘State of Uttarakhand’ for Vacation of Interim order
dated 11.01.2023 and for Directions filed by Mr. Abhishek Atrey,
Advocate in I.A. No. 186910/2022) IN RE : GAURAV KUMAR BANSAL WITH
I. A. NO. 336381 OF 20225 (Application for Intervention on behalf
of ‘Anupam Kumar Bisht’, Applicant filed by Mr. Manish Raghav,
Advocate in I.A. No. 186910/2022) IN RE : ANUPAM KUMAR BISHT WITH
I. A. NO. 25296 OF 2026 (Application for Intervention on behalf of
‘Anil Baluni, Member of Parliament (Garhwal-Lok Sabha)’, Applicant
filed by Mr. Sunny Kadiyan, Advocate in I.A. No. 186910/2022) IN15
RE: ANIL BALUNI, MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT (GARHWAL-LOK SABHA) AND [5]
I.A. NOS. 185063 & 185065 OF 2025 [Applications for Directions &
O.T. filed by Ms. Shibani Ghosh, Advocate] WITH I. A. NO. 185066 OF
2025 [Application for Intervention filed by Ms. Shibani Ghosh,
Advocate] WITH I. A. NO. 233149 OF 2025 [Application for permission
to place on record Additional facts and documents in I.A. No.
185063/2025 filed by Ms. Shibani Ghosh, Advocate] WITH I. A. NO.
275143 OF 2025 [Application for Directions in I.A. No. 185063/2025
filed by Ms. Shibani Ghosh, Advocate] IN RE: DEBADITYO SINHA AND
[6] CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 938 OF 2021 IN CIVIL APPEAL NOS.
12234-12235 OF 2018 IN WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 202 OF 1995 (Under
Article 32 of the Constitution of India) “ONLY” ARE LISTED IN W.P.
(C) No. 202 OF 1995 “ONLY” ON 12.02.2026 AND THE NAMES OF “ONLY”
THE FOLLOWING ADVOCATES MAY BE TREATED TO HAVE BEEN SHOWN AGAINST
THESE I.As. MR. HARISH N. SALVE, SR. ADV. [A.C.], MR. A.D.N. RAO,
SR. ADVOCATE [A.C.], MS. APARAJITA SINGH, SR. ADVOCATE [A.C.], MR.
SIDDHARTHA CHOWDHURY, ADVOCATE [A.C.] MR. K. PARAMESHWAR, SR.
ADVOCATE [A.C.] MR. G.S. MAKKER, ADVOCATE MR. S.N. TERDAL, ADVOCATE
DR. N. VISAKAMURTHY, ADVOCATE FOR S. NO. [1] MR. K. PARAMESHWAR,
SR. ADVOCATE (A.C.), MS. ANISHA UPADHYAY FOR S. NO. [2] MR. K.
PARAMESHWAR SR. ADVOCATE (A.C.), MR. AJIT SHARMA FOR S. NO. [3] MR.
K. PARAMESHWAR (A.C.), MS. SHIBANI GHOSH, MR. AKSHAY AMRITANSHU
(STATE OF HARYANA) FOR S. NO. [4 & 4(a)] MR. K. PARAMESHWAR (A.C.),
MR. GAURAV KR. BANSAL (P-I-P), DR. ABHISHEK ATREY (STATE OF
UTTARAKHAND), MR. ATUL SHARMA (STATE OF UTTARAKHAND), MR. MANISH
RAGHAV, MR. SUNNY KADIYAN FOR S. NO. [5] MR. K. PARAMESHWAR, SR.
ADVOCATE (A.C.), MS. SHIBANI GHOSH, M/S. TRUST LEGAL FOR S. NO. [6]
MR. K. PARAMESHWAR (A.C.), MS. SRISHTI AGNIHOTRI, MR. SYED JAFAR
ALAM)
WITH
CONMT.PET.(C) No. 319/2021 in W.P.(C) No. 202/1995 (PIL-W)
IN I.A. NO. 90182 OF 2019, IA No. 140286/2023 – CONDONATION OF
DELAY IN FILING COUNTER AFFIDAVIT, IA No. 66719/2021 – EXEMPTION
FROM FILING AFFIDAVIT, IA No. 197412/2023 – EXEMPTION FROM FILING
O.T., IA No. 197410/2023 – PERMISSION TO PLACE ADDITIONAL FACTS AND
GROUNDS)
CONMT.PET.(C) No. 938/2021 in C.A. No. 12234-12235/2018 (XVII)
(IA No. 115589/2024 – PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL
DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES)
Date : 12-02-2026 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM : HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JOYMALYA BAGCHI
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPUL M. PANCHOLI
Mr. K. Parameshwar, Sr. Adv. (A.C.)
Mr. Mukunda, Adv.
Ms. Raji Gururaj, Adv.
Ms. Kanti, Adv.
16
Mr. Shreenivas Patil, Adv.
Ms. Veda Singh, Adv.
Mr. Prasad Hegde, Adv.
Mr. Sai Kaushal, Adv.
For Petitioner(s): Mr. Sanjay Parikh, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Srishti Agnihotri, AOR
Ms. Tara Elizabeth Kurien, Adv.
Ms. Kritika, Adv.
Mr. D.p.singh, Adv.
Ms. Anchal Kanthed, Adv.
Petitioner-in-person
By Courts Motion, AOR
Mr. Chanchal Kumar Ganguli, AOR
M/S. Plr Chambers And Co., AOR
Mr. Syed Mehdi Imam, AOR
Mr. T. Harish Kumar, AOR
M/S. Mitter & Mitter Co., AOR
M/S. Lawyer S Knit & Co, AOR
For Respondent(s): Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, A.S.G.
Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker, AOR
Ms. Ruchi Kohli, Adv.
Ms. Suhashini Sen, Adv.
Mr. Raghav Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Gaurang Bhushan, Adv.
Mr. Baij Nath Patel, Adv.
Mr. Rohan Gupta, Adv.
Mr. Gaichangpou Gangmei, AOR
Mr. Raj Kishor Choudhary, AOR
Mr. Shakeel Ahmed, Adv.
Mr. Vikram Patralekh, Adv.
Ms. Shalini Tripathi, Adv.
Mr. Himanshu Gupta Is, Adv.
Mr. Shivam Yadav, Adv.
Mr. Waseem Akhtar Khan, Adv.
Ms. Pratibha Singh, Adv.
Mr. Shuvodeep Roy, AOR
Mr. Deepayan Dutta, Adv.
Mr. Saurabh Tripathi, Adv.
Mr. Ashok Mathur, AOR
Ms. Shardha Zutshi, Adv.
M/S. Parekh & Co., AOR
M/S. K J John And Co, AOR
Mr. V. Balachandran, AOR
Mr. S. C. Birla, AOR
17
Mr. Ajit Pudussery, AOR
Mr. T. Mahipal, AOR
Mr. Umesh Bhagwat, AOR
Mrs. M. Qamaruddin, AOR
Mr. H. S. Parihar, AOR
Ms. Baby Krishnan, AOR
Mr. P. R. Ramasesh, AOR
Ms. Adviteeya, Adv.
Mr. Rakesh K. Sharma, AOR
Mr. P. N. Gupta, AOR
Mr. Sarad Kumar Singhania, AOR
Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR
Mr. Kuldip Singh, AOR
Ms. Bina Madhavan, AOR
Ms. Pratibha Jain, AOR
Mr. Rajat Joseph, AOR
Mr. Gopal Prasad, AOR
Ms. Jyoti Mendiratta, AOR
Mr. S.. Udaya Kumar Sagar, AOR
Mr. Ranjan Mukherjee, AOR
Ms. Sharmila Upadhyay, AOR
Mr. Tejaswi Kumar Pradhan, AOR
Mr. Pranab Samantaray, Adv.
Mr. Manoranjan Paikaray, Adv.
Mr. Pradeep Kar, Adv.
M/S. Arputham Aruna And Co, AOR
Mrs. Nandini Gore, AOR
Mr. Raj Kumar Mehta, AOR
Ms. Madhu Moolchandani, AOR
Mrs. B. Sunita Rao, AOR
Mr. Rajeev Singh, AOR
Mrs. Kanchan Kaur Dhodi, AOR
Mr. Surya Kant, AOR
Mr. Subhash Chandra Sagar, Adv.
Mr. Hemant Kumar Sagar, Adv.
Ms. Divyanshi Bucha, Adv.
Mr. E. C. Vidya Sagar, AOR
M/s. M. V. Kini & Associates, AOR
Mrs. Manik Karanjawala, AOR
Mr. Kamal Mohan Gupta, AOR
Mr. Prashant Kumar, AOR
Mr. Dharmendra Kumar Sinha, AOR
Mr. Kanishk Mor, Adv.
Mr. P. Parmeswaran, AOR
18
Ms. Sujata Kurdukar, AOR
Ms. Charu Mathur, AOR
Mr. Bhavanishankar V.gadnis, Adv.
Mrs. Santhanalakshmi, Adv.
Mr. A. Venayagam Balan, AOR
Mr. Vishwanath Gadnis, Adv.
Mr. Sudarsh Menon, AOR
Mr. Ramesh Babu M. R., AOR
Mr. Vikrant Singh Bais, AOR
Mr. Shiva Pujan Singh, AOR
Ms. K. V. Bharathi Upadhyaya, AOR
Ms. Pritama, Adv.
Dr. Sunita, Adv.
Ms. Shaivani Gupta, Adv.
Mr. Bipin Vinayak Chandan, Adv.
Mr. Sufyan Hasan, Adv.
Ms. Hema Malik, Adv.
Mr. Rajiv Mehta, AOR
Mr. Ejaz Maqbool, AOR
Mr. Rajesh, AOR
M/S. Corporate Law Group, AOR
Mr. Lakshmi Raman Singh, AOR
Mr. B V Deepak, AOR
Mr. T. N. Singh, AOR
Mr. Rajendra Sahu, Adv.
Mrs. Hema Sahu, Adv.
Mr. Rishabh Sahu, Adv.
Mr. C. L. Sahu, AOR
Ms. Sumita Hazarika, AOR
Ms. Kalpana K Tripathy, Adv.
Mr. Prakhar Gupta, Adv.
Mr. Nalin Kohli, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Abhay Anil Anturkar, Adv.
Mr. Dhruv Tank, Adv.
Ms. Surbhi Kapoor, AOR
Ms. Abha R. Sharma, AOR
Mr. Abhishek Chaudhary, AOR
Mr. Gopal Singh, AOR
Mr. T. V. George, AOR
Mr. Krishnanand Pandeya, AOR
Mr. Neeraj Shekhar, AOR
Ms. Asha Gopalan Nair, AOR
Mrs. Rekha Pandey, AOR
Mr. Mohd. Irshad Hanif, AOR
19
Mr. Punit Dutt Tyagi, AOR
Mr. Rathin Das, AOR
Mr. Ratan Kumar Choudhuri, AOR
Mr. Sudhir Kulshreshtha, AOR
Mr. Rajesh Singh, AOR
Mr. Hitesh Kumar Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Amit Kumar Chawla, Adv.
Mr. Akhileshwar Jha, Adv.
Mr. Rajesh Singh Aor, Adv.
Mr. Varun Varma, Adv.
Mr. Sandeep Singh Dingra, Adv.
Ms. Shreya Jha, Adv.
Ms. Niharika Dwivedi, Adv.
Ms. Manisha Chawla, Adv.
Ms. Charanjeet Sidhu, Adv.
Ms. Swati Vishan, Adv.
Ms. Ritika Raj, Adv.
Mr. Subham Rajhans, Adv.
Mr. Ishank Ranjan, Adv.
Mr. Prakhar Shukla, Adv.
Mr. Anupam Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Jogender Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Dilip Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Kamlesh Kumar Pandey, Adv.
Mr. Raghavendra Pratap Singh, Adv.
Mr. Umesh Chandra Paswan, Adv.
Mr. Prince Raj, Adv.
Mr. Santosh Kumar Jha, Adv.
Mr. Satish Chandra, Adv.
Mr. Sandeep Kumar Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Honey Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Desh Pal Singh, Adv.
Ms. Hemantika Wahi, AOR
Ms. Sushma Suri, AOR
Mr. Sudhir Kumar Gupta, AOR
Mr. A. N. Arora, AOR
Mr. Irshad Ahmad, AOR
Mr. G. Prakash, AOR
Mr. Himanshu Shekhar, AOR
Mr. Shiv Vinayak Gupta, Adv.
Mrs. Bina Gupta, AOR
Ms. Anushka Rawal, Adv.
Mr. P. V. Yogeswaran, AOR
Mr. Jitendra Mohan Sharma, AOR
Ms. Malini Poduval, AOR
Ms. C. K. Sucharita, AOR
Mr. E. M. S. Anam, AOR
20
Mr. Shibashish Misra, AOR
Mr. K. L. Janjani, AOR
Mr. Naresh K. Sharma, AOR
Ms. A. Sumathi, AOR
Ms. A. Sumathi, Adv.
Mr. Jai Prakash Pandey, AOR
Ms. Binu Tamta, AOR
Mr. K. V. Vijayakumar, AOR
Mrs. Rani Chhabra, AOR
Ms. Divya Roy, AOR
Mr. Tarun Johri, AOR
Mr. Radha Shyam Jena, AOR
Mrs. Anjani Aiyagari, AOR
Mr. Abhishek Atrey, AOR
Dr. Abhishek Atrey, Adv.
Ms. Ishita Bist, Adv.
Ms.` Ambika Atrey, Adv.
Mr. Navneet Gupta, Adv.
Ms. Chaitra Bhat, Adv.
Mr. M. Yogesh Kanna, AOR
Mr. Deep Rao Palepu, Adv.
Mr. Arjun Agarwal, Adv.
Mr. Syed Jafar Alam, AOR
Ms. Sanjana Saddy , AOR
Mr. S. Hari Haran, Adv.
Mr. Vikash Singh, AOR
Mr. Naveen Kumar, AOR
Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, AOR
M/S. D.s.k. Legal, AOR
Mr. Sanjay Parikh, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Shibani Ghosh, AOR
Ms. Parul Gupta, Adv.
Ms. Kritika, Adv.
Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, AOR
Mr. Shiv Mangal Sharma, A.A.G.
Mr. Saurabh Rajpal, Adv.
Ms. Arushi Rathore, Adv.
Ms. Nidhi Jaswal, AOR
Mr Rahul Jain, AOR
Mr. Sabarish Subramanian, AOR
21
M/S. Karanjawala & Co., AOR
M/S. Khaitan & Co., AOR
Mr. Ashutosh Dubey, AOR
Mr. Ashutosh Dubey, Adv.
Mrs. Rajshri Dubey, Adv.
Mr. Abhishek Chauhan, Adv.
Mr. Amit P Shahi, Adv.
Mr. Rahul Bhardwaj, Adv.
Mr. Anjan Datta, Adv.
Mr. Rahul Sethi, Adv.
Mrs. Rekha Chaudhary, Adv.
M/s. Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas Aor, AOR
Mr. Sandeep Kumar Jha, AOR
Mr. Milind Kumar, AOR
Mr. Mohit Paul, AOR
Ms. Rashmi Nandakumar, AOR
Ms. Manika Tripathy, AOR
Ms. Pallavi Langar, AOR
Mr. Rajeev Kumar Dubey, AOR
Mr. Rajeev Maheshwaranand Roy, AOR
Mr. Vaibhav Niti, AOR
Mr. Rakeshwar Lall Sud, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Arjun Lall, Adv.
Ms. Anisha Upadhyay, AOR
Ms. Adarsh Nain, AOR
Mr. Guntur Pramod Kumar, AOR
Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, A.S.G.
Ms. Ruchi Kohli, Adv.
Mr. Gaurang Bhushan, Adv.
Mr. Baijnath Patel, Adv.
Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv.
Mr. Amrish Kumar, AOR
Ms. Shivika Mehra, Adv.
Ms. Seema Bengani, Adv.
Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma-aor, Adv.
Ms. Purnima Krishna, AOR
Mr. M.f.philip, Adv.
Mr. Karamveer Singh Yadav, Adv.
Mr. Togin M. Babichen, Adv.
Mrs. Aishwarya Bhati Ld, A.S.G.
Mrs. Ruchi Kohli, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR
Mr. Jagdish Chandra Solanki, Adv.
Mr. Gaurang Bhushan, Adv.
Ms. Suhashini Sen, Adv.
22
Mr. Raghav Sharma, Adv.
Dr. Surender Singh Hooda, AOR
Ms. Ankita Sharma, AOR
Mr. Arjun D. Singh, Adv.
Ms. Ishika Neogi, Adv.
Mr. Divya Tripathi, Adv.
Ms. Supreeta Sharanagouda, AOR
Mr. Sharanagouda Patil, Adv.
Mrs. Supreeta Sharanagouda (aor), Adv.
Ms. Ranu Purohit, AOR
Ms. Dharitry Phookan, AOR
Mr. Gautam Das, AOR
Mr. Dhirendra Kumar Jha, Adv.
Ms. Khushi Chopra, Adv.
Mr. Abanikanta Sahu, Adv.
Mr. Kumar Pal, Adv.
Mr. J.d.sharma, Adv.
Ms. Khushi Chopra, Adv.
Mr. Lalit Belwal, Adv.
Mr. Virendra Mohan, Adv.
Ms. Smita Samantaray, Adv.
Mr. R.k.padhi, Adv.
Mr. Rohit Oberoi, Adv.
Ms. Seita Vaidyalingam, AOR
Mr. Anando Mukherjee, AOR
Ms. Anzu. K. Varkey, AOR
Ms. Astha Sharma, AOR
Mr. T. R. B. Sivakumar, AOR
Mr. Sujit Kumar Mishra , AOR
Mr. Sunil Kumar Verma, AOR
Mr. Prakash Kumar Singh, AOR
Ms. Tanya Srivastava, AOR
Mr. Aniteja Sharma, AOR
Mr. Sanjay Parikh, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Srishti Agnihotri, AOR
Ms. Tara Elizabeth Kurien, Adv.
Ms. Kritika, Adv.
Mr. D.p.singh, Adv.
Ms. Anchal Kanthed, Adv.
Mr. Nishanth Patil, AOR
Mr. Arijit Dey, Adv.
23
Ms. Bhumi Agrawal, Adv.
Mr. Abhishek Gupta, Adv.
Mr. Awanish Gupta, Adv.
M/S. Venkat Palwai Law Associates, AOR
Mr. Ajay Marwah, AOR
Mr. Ravindra S. Garia, AOR
Mr. Vivek Jain, A.A.G.
Mr. Karan Sharma, AOR
Ms. Sugandha Anand , AOR
Mr. Aldanish Rein, AOR
Mr. Kunal Mimani, AOR
Mr. Shantanu Kumar, AOR
Mr. Manan Verma, AOR
Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR
Ms. Vanshaja Shukla, AOR
Mr. Chirag M. Shroff, AOR
Ms. Mayuri Raghuvanshi, AOR
Mr. Vivek Jain, AOR
Mr. Abhishek Saket, Adv.
Mr. Sudeep Kumar, AOR
Ms. Manisha, Adv.
Ms. Rupali, Adv.
Ms. Rani Mishra, AOR
Mr. Avijit Mani Tripathi, AOR
Mr. T.K. Nayak, Adv.
Mr. Marbinang Khongwir, Adv.
Mr. Deeptakirti Verma, AOR
Ms. Usha Nandini V., AOR
Mr. Avneesh Arputham, AOR
Mr. Ankit Sharma, Adv.
Ms. Sanjana Saddy, AOR
Mr. Ajay Aggarwal, A.A.G.
Mr. Rajeev Kumar Dubey, Adv.
Mr. Ashiwan Mishra, Adv.
Ms. Aditi Mishra, Adv.
Mr. Kamlendra Mishra, AOR
Mr. Somesh Chandra Jha, AOR
Ms. Ruchira Goel, AOR
24
Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv.
Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR
Mr. Shrirang B. Varma, Adv.
Mr. Bharat Bagla, Adv.
Mr. Sourav Singh, Adv.
Mr. Aditya Krishna, Adv.
Mr. Adarsh Dubey, Adv.
Ms. Chitransha Singh Sikarwar, Adv.
Mr. Parth Awasthi, Adv.
Mr. Pashupathi Nath Razdan, AOR
Ms. Maitreyee Jagat Joshi, Adv.
Mr. Astik Gupta, Adv.
Ms. Akanksha Tomar, Adv.
Mr. Tarun Gupta, AOR
Mr. Hirday Virdi, Adv.
Mr. Sidhant Ranta, Adv.
Mr. Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar, AOR
Mr. Karun Sharma, Adv.
Ms. Anupama Ngangom, Adv.
Ms. Rajkumari Divyasana, Adv.
Mr. Venkata Raghuvamsy D. , AOR
Ms. Swathi H. Prasad, AOR
Mr. Adeel Ahmed, AOR
Mr. Ekansh Mishra, AOR
Mr. P. S. Sudheer, AOR
Mr. Sunny Choudhary, AOR
Mr. Siddhartha Jha, AOR
M/S. V. Maheshwari & Co., AOR
Mr. Mayank Aggarwal, AOR
Mr. Pradeep Kumar Aggarwal, Adv.
Mr. Vineet Yadav, Adv.
Mr. Amir Yadav, Adv.
Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, AOR
Mr. Sameer Abhyankar, AOR
Mr. Krishna Rastogi, Adv.
Mr. Aryan Srivastava, Adv.
Ms. Ranjeeta Rohatgi, AOR
Mr. Shubham Upadhyay, AOR
Ms. Anukriti Bajpai, Adv.
Mr. Vivek Gupta, AOR
Dr. Arvind S. Avhad, AOR
Mr. Naveen Kumar, AOR
Mr. P. K. Manohar, AOR
25
Mr. Vinod Sharma, AOR
Ms. Surbhi Mehta, AOR
Mr. Rajeev Singh, AOR
Ms. Parul Shukla, AOR
Mr. Shovan Mishra, AOR
Ms. Bipasa Tripathy, Adv.
Mr. Shlok Luthra, Adv.
Mr. Ashutosh Kumar Sharma, AOR
Ms. Suman Kukrety, AOR
Mrs. Aishwarya Bhati, A.S.G.
Ms. Ruchi Kohli, Adv.
Ms, Suhashini Sen, Adv.
Mr. Shyam Gopal, Adv.
Mr. Raghav Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Raman Yadav, Adv.
Ms. Sunanda Shukla, Adv.
Dr. N. Visakamurthy, AOR
Mrs. Sumita Ray, AOR
Ms. Disha Ray, Adv.
Mr. Kunal Narwal, Adv.
Ms. Vanshika Singh, Adv.
Mr. B. K. Pal, AOR
Mr. James P. Thomas, AOR
Mr. S. Gowthaman, AOR
Mr. A. Karthik, AOR
Mr. Rajiv Kumar Choudhry, AOR
Mr. Anurag Tandon, AOR
Mr. Abhishek Pandey, Adv.
Mr. Prashant Kumar Umrao, AOR
Mr. Arun K. Sinha, AOR
Ms. Sakshi Kakkar, AOR
Mr. Aman Panwar, A.A.G.
Mr. Sanchit Garga, AOR
Mr. Kunal Rana, Adv.
Mr. Shashwat Jaiswal, Adv.
Mr. Manav Kaushik, Adv.
Mr. Abhinav Kumar, Adv.
Ms. Tanu Priya Gupta, AOR
Ms. Shalini Kaul, AOR
Mr. Sunil Kumar Sharma, AOR
Ms. Swati Ghildiyal, AOR
26
Ms. Neha Singh, Adv.
Mr. Siddharth Sharma, AOR
Mrs. Aishwarya Bhati, A.S.G.
Ms. Ruchi Kohli, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Suhasini Sen, Adv.
Mr. Raghav Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Gaurang Bhushan, Adv.
Mr. Baijnath Patel, Adv.
Mr. Raj Bahadur Yadav, AOR
Mr. Sudarshan Lamba, Aor, Adv.
Mr. Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General
Mr. Lokesh Sinhal, Sr. A.A.G.
Ms. Dr. Monika Gusain, Sr. Adv.
Mr. B.k. Satija, A.A.G.
Ms. Karishma Malani, A.A.G.
Mr. Akshay Amritanshu, AOR
Mr. Madhav Sinhal, Adv.
Mr. Rahul Khurana, Adv.
Mr. Arjun Yaduvanshi, Adv.
Mr. Nikunj Gupta, Adv.
Mr. Sarthak Srivastava, Adv.
Mr. Mayur Goyal, Adv.
Ms. Seema Sindhu, Adv.
Mr. Sarthak Arya, Adv.
Mr. Abhishek Chand, Adv.
Mr. Abhay Nair, Adv.
Mr. Harsh Kumar Singh, Adv.
Mr. Omanakuttan K. K., AOR
Mr. Ajit Sharma, AOR
Mr. Kanchan Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Yuvrajsinh Solanki, Adv.
Mr. Anant Ram Mishra, Adv.
Mr. Lareb Habib Ansari, Adv.
Mr. Ashutosh Senger, Adv.
Mr. Avijit Roy, AOR
Mr. Pawanshree Agrawal, AOR
Mr. Pradeep Kumar Rai, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Farhat Naim, Adv.
Mrs. Rajshree Rai, Adv.
Mr. Vinay Kumar Rai, Adv.
Ms. Modoyia Kayina, Adv.
Mr. Paras Chauhan, Adv.
Mr. Parimal Rai, Adv.
Mr. Shreyansh Singh, Adv.
M/s R And R Law Associates, AOR
27
Mr. Ranjeet Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Samyak Mordia, Adv.
Mr. Vaibhav Agarwal, Adv.
Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, AOR
Mr. Nishe Rajen Shonker, AOR
Mrs. Anu K Joy, Adv.
Mr. Alim Anvar, Adv.
Mr. Santhosh K, Adv.
Mrs. Devika A.l., Adv.
Mr. Nishit Agrawal, AOR
Mr. Krishna Ballabh Thakur, AOR
Ms. Aruna Gupta, AOR
Mr. Samir Ali Khan, AOR
Mr. Pranjal Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Sachin Patil, AOR
Mr. Nishant Awana, AOR
Mr. Salvador Santosh Rebello, AOR
Mr. Jaskirat Pal Singh, Adv.
Ms. Moulishree Pathak, Adv.
Mr. Ujjawal Agrawal, Adv.
Ms. Ngacheitharin Chiphang, Adv.
Mr. Vivek Sharma, AOR
Dr. Vijay Kumar Sharma, Adv.
Mrs. Pragya Baghel, AOR
Ms. Deepanwita Priyanka, AOR
Mr. Satyalipsu Ray, Adv.
Mr. Shishir Kumar Jha, Adv.
Ms. Priyal Sheth, Adv.
Mr. Raghvendra Kumar, AOR
Mr. Sravan Kumar Karanam, AOR
Mr. Kumar Abhishek, Adv.
Ms. M. Harshini, Adv.
Ms. K. Enatoli Sema, AOR
Mr. Amit Kumar Singh, Adv.
Ms. Chubalemla Chang, Adv.
Mr. Prang Newmai, Adv.
Ms. Yanmi Phazang,, Adv.
Mr. Shishir Deshpande, AOR
28
Mr. Yusuf, AOR
Dr. Ram Sankar, Adv.
Mr. Adhil N, Adv.
Mr. Naveenkumar M A, Adv.
Mr. Suryanarayanan Muthukrishnan, Adv.
Mr. Agam Sharma, AOR
Mr. Prarit Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Rajiv Shankar Dvivedi, AOR
Mr. Kumar Sameer, Adv.
Mr. S.k. Sarkar, Adv.
Ms. Arti Dvivedi, Adv.
Ms. Sugandha Bhardwaj, Adv.
Mr. Bhushan, Adv.
Ms. Priya, Adv.
Ms. Snigdha Singh, Adv.
Ms. Priyanka Parmar, Adv.
Ms. Sweta Singh, Adv.
Ms. Bansuri Swaraj, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Sunny Kadiyan, AOR
Mr. Sidharth Yadav, Adv.
Mr. Siddhesh Kotwal, Adv.
Mr. Sooraj Singh, Adv.
Ms. Gulsheen Bajwa, Adv.
Mr. Vishvender Singh, Adv.
Mr. Nitin Joshi, Adv.
Mr. Vaibhav Thaledi, Adv.
Mr. Shivam Rawat, Adv.
Mr. Swaroop Sagar Roy, Adv.
Mr. Kadam Hans, Adv.
Mr. Harsimran Singh, Adv.
Mr. Gopal Balwant Sathe, AOR
Mr. Sarvam Ritam Khare, AOR
Mr. Kushagra Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Akarsh Khare, Adv.
Mr. K. M. Nataraj Ld. A.S.G.
Mr. Harish Pandey, Adv.
Ms. Indira Bhakar, Adv.
Mr. Anuj Srinivas Udupa, Adv.
Mr. Krishna Kant Dubey, Adv.
Mr. Piyush Beriwal, Adv.
Mr. Neeraj Kumar Sharma, Adv.
Ms. Mrinal Elker Mazumdar, Adv.
Mr. Shashwat Parihar, Adv.
Mr. Mukesh K Verma, Adv.
Mr. Vinayak Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Santosh Ramdurg, Adv.
29
Mr. Yogesh Vats, Adv.
Mr. Shreekant Neelappa Terdal, AOR
Ms. Sunieta Ojha, AOR
Mr. Dinesh Chandra Pandey, AOR
Applicant-in-person, AOR
Mr. Anant Mann, AOR
Mr. Lakshmeesh S. Kamath, AOR
Mrs. Samriti Ahuja, Adv.
Ms. Aditi Prakash, Adv.
Mr. Vikas Kumar, AOR
Mr. Fuzail Ahmad Ayyubi, AOR
Mr. Mustafa Khaddam Hussain, Adv.
Mr. Ibad Mushtaq, Adv.
Ms. Akanksha Rai, Adv.
Mr. Kaushik Choudhury, AOR
Mr. Aravindh S., AOR
Mr. Akshay Gupta, Adv.
Mrs. Kirti Renu Mishra, AOR
Mr. Atul Sharma, AOR
Mr. Anirudh Sanganeria, AOR
Mr. Chinmay Deshpande, Adv.
Mr. Saurabh Rajpal, AOR
Mr. Himinder Lal, AOR
Ms. Shruti Jose, AOR
Mr. Durgesh Ramchandra Gupta, AOR
Ms. Rangoli Seth, AOR
Mr. Manish Raghav , AOR
Mr. Rohit Dandriyal, Adv.
Mr. Rohit Gour, Adv.
Mr. Siddharth Nair, Adv.
Ms. Akansha Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Rohit Singh Negi, Adv.
Mr. Prakash Srivastava, Adv.
Mr. Rajan Thakur, Adv.
Mr. Abhishek Atrey, AOR
Dr. Abhishek Atrey, Adv.
Ms. Ishita Bist, Adv.
Ms. Ambika Atrey, Adv.
Mr. Navneet Gupta, Adv.
Ms. Chaitra Bhat, Adv.
Ms. Mrinal Gopal Elker, AOR
30
Mr. Chinmoy Chaitanya, Adv.
Mr. Dhaval Mehrotra, AOR
Mr. Ravindra Kumar, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Binay Kumar Das, AOR
Ms. Priyanka Das, Adv.
Ms. Neha Das, Adv.
Mr. Shivam Saksena, Adv.
Ms. Lakshmi N. Kaimal, AOR
Mr. Shrey Kapoor , AOR
Ms. Anne Mathew, AOR
Mr. Yash S. Vijay, AOR
Mr. Sarvan Shukla, Adv.
Mr. Adarsh Kumar Tiwari, AOR
Ms. Vartika Maurya, Adv.
Ms. Ritwika Nanda, Adv.
Mr. Petal Chandhok, Adv.
Mr. Gaichangpou Gangmei, Adv.
M/s Trust Legal, AOR
Mr. Varun K Chopra, Adv.
M/s Vkc Law Offices, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Item 1 – In Re: Kulwant Singh & Ors.
IA Nos. 1409 of 2026, 1413 of 2026 and 1416 of 2026
1. The applications stand disposed of in terms of the signed
order.
Item 2 – In Re: Mohit Kumar
IA Nos 324676 of 2025, 324677 of 2025 & 334531 of 2025
2. The applications stand disposed of in terms of the signed
order.
31
Item 3 – In Re: Dr. R.P Balwan, IFS (Retd.) & Ors
IA Nos.244339 of 2025 and 244340 of 2025, CEC Report No.05/2026
3. Let these applications be listed along with Suo-Motu Writ
Petition (Civil) No.10 of 2025 on 26.02.2026.
Item 4 – In Re: Rajaji Tigar Reserve, Uttarakhand
Contempt Petition(C) No.319/2021, CEC Report No.01/2024, IA No.
66719/2021, IA No.140286/2023, IA No.197410/2023, IA No.197412/2023
Item 4(a) – CEC Report No.30/2022, IA No.52187/2023, IA
No.197351/2024, IA No.2665/2024, CEC Report No.28/2024, IA
No.271988/2025, IA No.336381/2025, IA No.25296/2026 in W.P. (C)
No.202/1995
4. The interlocutory applications are partly allowed and the
Contempt Petition, along with pending interlocutory applications,
if any, stands disposed of in terms of the signed order.
Item No.5 – In Re: Debadityo Sinha
IA No.185063/2025, IA No.185065/202, IA No.185066/2025, IA
No.275143/2025
5. Post on 23.02.2026 at 2 p.m.
ITEM NO.6
Contempt Petition(C) No.938/2021 in C.A. Nos.12234-12235/2018
6. The Contempt Proceeding, along with pending interlocutory
applications, if any, stands disposed of in terms of the signed
order.
(NITIN TALREJA) (ARJUN BISHT) (PREETHI T.C.)
AR-cum-PS AR-cum-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
32
