Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Indian Medical Association vs Union Of India on 11 August, 2025
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (C) NO.645/2022
INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION & ANR Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s)
WITH
WRIT PETITION (C) NO. 400/2025
O R D E R
WRIT PETITION (C) NO.645/2022 We have heard Sri. Shadan Farasat, learned Amicus Curiae, who has been appointed by this Court and learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Solicitor General, learned Additional Solicitor General, learned senior counsel and learned counsel for the respondents.
2. The prayers sought for by the petitioners in this writ petition read as under -
“(i) Pass an order directing the Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 to immediately take strict and prompt action, in accordance with law, for the violation of the provisions of the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954, the Drugs & Cosmetics Rules, 1945 and the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 by the repeated acts of omission and commission of Respondent No.5 – Patanjali Ayurved Signature Not Verified Ltd. including by publishing advertisements all Digitally signed by NEETU SACHDEVA Date: 2025.08.28 over the country making illegal and prohibited 17:26:24 IST Reason: claims, and to file an action taken report before this Hon’ble Court.
1(ii) Pass an order directing the Respondent No.4 – Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) to take action including by filing a complaint against Patanjali Ayurved Ltd. u/s 92 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, for publishing the false and misleading advertisements including / such as the advertisement dt. 10.07.2022.
(iii) Pass an order directing the Respondent No.4 – Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) to frame guidelines in exercise of powers u/s 18 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 for prohibiting false and misleading advertisements in relation to Allopathy and Modern Medicine.
(iv) Pass an order prohibiting the Respondent No.5 – Patanjali Ayurved Ltd. from issuing any such advertisement to the effect of making impermissible / illegal / defamatory statements against the members of the Petitioner No.1 Association and / or from issuing advertisements in future such as the advertisement dt. 10.07.2022 – incorporating therein claims of cures, which are prohibited by various provisions of law as set out in the present Writ Petition;
(v) Pass such other or further orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the present case and in the interest of justice.”
3. It is not in dispute that the object and purpose as well as the reliefs sought for by the petitioners in this writ petition have been substantially achieved by various orders passed by this Court.
4. However, subsequently, the writ petition has been considered on various dates and several orders have been passed. The significant orders passed in this Writ Petition read as under:
Order Dated: 27-02-2024:
“1. On the last date of hearing, i.e. on 21st November, 2023, after some arguments were advanced by learned Senior Counsel appearing for the 2 petitioners, learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the respondents no. 1 & 2 and learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondent no.5- Patanjali Ayurved Limited, Mr. K.M. Nataraj, learned Additional Solicitor General has stated that he may be permitted to obtain instructions regarding the alleged incorrect assertions/misrepresentations in respect of various products of the respondent no.5 in the market with regard to the medicinal efficacy of the said products, as also with regard to the measures to be put in place for curbing misstatements in the media (both electronic and print).
2. At that stage, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondent no.5- Patanjali Ayurved Limited had assured the Court that henceforth, there shall not be any violation of any of the laws, especially relating to advertisement and branding of products manufactured and marketed by the respondent no.5-
Patanjali Ayurved Limited. Further, no casual statements of claiming medicinal efficacy of any system of medicine will be released to the media in any form. This Court had bound down the respondent no.5-Patanjali Ayurved Limited to such assurances. It was also made clear that any suit pending inter se between the petitioner(s) and any person and the respondent no.5-Patanjali Ayurved Limited shall not be stayed and shall continue before the concerned Courts.
xxx xxx xxx
5. We may note that Section 3(d) of the 1954 Act prohibits advertisement of certain products for treatment of certain diseases and disorders, including thereof diabetes (Sr. No.9), Heart Diseases (Sr. No.26), High or Low Blood Pressure (Sr. No. 27) and Obesity (Sr. No. 38) and Asthma (Appended to the 1955 Rules at Sr. No.1).
xxx xxx xxx
14. Till further orders, the respondent no.5- Patanjali Ayurved Limited is restrained from advertising or branding of products manufactured and marketed by it which are meant to cure the diseases/disorders/conditions specified in the 1954 Act and 1955 Rules. Respondent no.5 and its officers are also cautioned to refrain from making any statements against any system of medicine in the media (both electronic and print) in any form, as undertaken on 21st November, 2023.” Order Dated: 23-04-2024 “xxx xxx xxx 3
5. We are of the opinion that the issue relating to implementation of the relevant provisions of the Drug and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954 and the Rules, Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 and the Rules and the Consumers Protection Act, 1986 and the Rules, need a closer examination in the light of the grievances raised by the petitioner-Association, not just limited to the respondents before this Court, but to all similarly placed FMCGs/Pharmaceutical Companies who have been issuing misleading advertisements relating to the products manufactured and marketed by them and taking the public at large for a ride, in particular, adversely affecting the health and well-being of babies, young children, women (including actating and pregnant women), senior citizens and the sick and infirm, who have been consuming the products on the basis of the said misrepresentations.
6. Further, Union of India is called upon to explain the letter dated 29th August, 2023 issued by the Under Secretary, Ministry of AYUSH, Government of India addressed to all States/UT Licensing Authorities and Drug Controllers of AYUSH informing them that the Ayurvedic Siddha and Unani Drugs Technical Advisory Board (ASUDTAB) in its meeting held on 25th May, 2023, has recommended to proceed with the final Notification omitting Rule 170 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945 and its related provisions and in the meantime, all authorities have been directed not to initiate/take any action under Rule 170. Notably, in all this duration, the said Rule has not been deleted and at the same time, it is not being enforced on the strength of the aforesaid letter.
7. Having regard to the number of misleading advertisements being published/displayed with little/nil accountability on the part of the manufacturers, promoters as also the press/electronic media, besides the Ministry of AYUSH, it is considered necessary to implead the Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Ministry of Food and Public Distribution, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting and the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology to examine the steps taken by each of the aforesaid Ministries to prevent the abuse of the Drug and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954 and the Rules, the Drug and Cosmetics Act, 1940 and the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. All the State Governments/UT Licensing Authorities being necessary and proper parties 4 shall also be impleaded as corespondents in the present petition.
8. Mr. K.M. Nataraj, learned Additional Solicitor General who is appearing virtually, states that his briefing counsel is accepting notice on behalf of all the Ministries referred to hereinabove. The said Ministries shall file their respective affidavits explaining the action taken by them to prevent misuse/abuse of the aforesaid statutes along with the relevant data from the year 2018 onwards and the action taken on receiving such complaints either on the Grievances Against Misleading Advertisements portal (GAMA) or from any other source.
xxx xxx xxx”
5. During the pendency of this writ petition, the respondent/Ministry of Ayush by way of Notification dated 01.07.2024 issued under the Drugs (Fourth Amendment) Rules, 2024 had omitted Rule 170 of the 1945 Rules.
For immediate purpose, Rule 170 is extracted as under-
“170.Prohibition of advertisements of Ayurvedic, Sddha or Unani drugs. - (1) The manufacturer or his agent, of Ayurvedic, Siddha or Unani drugs, shall not participate in the publication of any advertisement relating to any drug for the use of diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment or prevention of any disease, disorder, syndrome or condition.
(2) The Ayurvedic, Siddha or Unani drug shall be advertised for he purpose other than specified n sub-rule (1) after the allotment of the Unique Identification Number.
(3) The manufacturer of he Ayurvedic, Siddha or Unani durg shall apply for the Unique Identification Number for the advertisement issued or aired before this notification, within he period of three months from the date of the publication of this notification.
(4) The application for advertisement shall be rejected if,
(i) it is incomplete; or
(ii) the intended advertisement does not contain the contact details of he manufacturer; or 5
(iii) the contents of the advertisement directly or indirectly tantamount to vulgarity or obscenity; or
(iv) it refers to any Ayurvedic, Siddha or Unani drug in terms which suggest or calculated to lead to the use of that drug or medicine for the enhancement of height and dimensions or capacity or performance of male or female sexual organs; or
(v) it depicts photographs or testimonials of celebrities or government officials; or
(vi) it refers to any Government or Autonomous organization of the Government; or
(vii) it gives a false impression about the true character of Ayurvedic, Siddha or Unani drug; or
(viii) it makes a misleading or exaggerated claim about the effectiveness of the said drug.
(5) The application for allotment of the Unique Identification Number for an advertisement shall be submitted in Form 26 E-4 to the State Licensing Authority or Drug Controller specifying therein the claims such as textual references, rationale from the authoritative books, indication(s) or use(s), evidence regarding safety, effectiveness and quality of the drug.
(6) The application fee of rupees one thousand per advertisement shall be deposited along with Form 26E-4 and other supporting documents.
(7) The application for the advertisement shall be submitted to the Licensing Authority of the State where the corporate office of the manufacturer is located, in case of Ayurvedic, Siddha or Unani drug is licensed for manufacturing in more than one State.
(8) The State Licensing Authority shall process the application (if required, in consultation with the concerned technical experts) for disposal within thirty days from the date of receipt of application along with complete information and shall allot Unique Identification Number for the advertisement.
(9) The manufacturer of Ayurvedic, Siddha or Unani drug may appeal to the State AYUSH or Health Secretary for the direction in case the application for allotment of Unique Identification Number under sub-rule (8) is not disposed off within the period of 30 days.
(10) The applicant shall furnish the required information to the Licensing Authority or Drugs Controller as and when called for, failing which 6 the application shall be rejected and the application fee shall stand forfeited.
(11) The State Licensing Authority or Drugs Controller on being satisfied with the application or otherwise, shall record and convey in Form 26 E- 5 the recorded contents of advertisement, reasons for rejection of application or any clarification required from the applicant.
(12) The advertisement recorded by the Licensing Authority or Drugs Controller in Form 26 E-5 shall be valid till the date of validity of license o manufacture for sale of hat drug and can be renewed thereafter.
(13) An appeal may be fled before the Central Government against he decision of the State Licensing Authority under sub-rule (11) and the order of Central Government shall be final and binding on the appellant and the State Licensing Authority.
(14) The State Government may notify in the official Gazette the officers of Ayurvedic, Siddha or Unani System to undertake the monitoring of the advertisements of Ayurvedic, Siddha or Unani drugs in the print, electronic, internet and audio-visual media and maintain printed register as well as online register of the advertisements with appropriate entries including those found inappropriate or invalid and action taken against such faulty advertisements and the State Government shall provide information of the advertisements to the Central Government on quarterly basis and also as and when sought by the Central Government.
(15) The State Licensing Authority may suspend or cancel the license of the manufacture of the Ayurvedic, Siddha or Unani drug as per the provisions of Rule 159, in case the directions given by the said authority is not complied.
(16) The Central Government shall, in he public interest, prohibit any advertisement of the Ayurvedic, Siddha or Unani drugs, by notification in the Official Gazette.”
6. However, subsequently, this Court by its order dated 27.08.2024 had stayed the said Notification dated 01.07.2024. The orders in that regard read as under:
7Order Dated: 27-08-2024:
“13. Mr. K.M. Natraj, learned Additional Solicitor General submits that this aspect may be permitted to be explained by the Ministry on an affidavit. Till further orders, the effect of the Notification dated 01st July, 2024, omitting Rule 170 shall stand stayed. In other words, till further orders are passed, Rule 170 shall remain on the statute book and in force.” Order Dated: 30-07-2024:
“xxx xxx xxx
2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the respondent No. 5 that vide order dated 17th May, 2024, the State Government had put on hold the order of suspension passed on 15th April, 2024 and thereafter constituted a Committee to examine the matter. The Committee submitted its report to the State Government on 29th June, 2024. Based on the recommendations of the Committee, the State Government cancelled the suspension order on 01st July, 2024 and issued a fresh notice to show cause to the respondent No.5 on 08th July, 2024.
3. We are informed by learned counsel for the State of Uttarakhand that the respondent No.5 has responded to the aforesaid show cause notice on 19th July, 2024. She seeks a reasonable time to take a decision in the matter.
4. The State Government is directed to pass an order pursuant to its show cause notice before the next date of hearing and communicate the same to the respondent No.5.
xxx xxx xxx
11. Learned Amicus Curiae has filed a Note for Hearing wherein he has summarized the comments and made some suggestions. One of the suggestions made by him relates to the substantive changes made in the prevailing mechanism of Ayush Drugs particularly in the context of Rule 158B II. (A) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945, which sets out a table and specifies at Serial No.3 as follows:
“II.(A) For issue of license to the medicine with respect to Ayurveda, Siddha and Unani, the conditions relating to safety study and the experience or evidence of effectiveness shall be such as specified in columns (5) and (6) of The Table given below:-8
Serial Category Ingredient(s) Indication(s) Safety Experience/ Evidence of Number study Effectiveness (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) Published Proof of Literature Effectiveness
1. (A) Ayurveda, As per text As per text Not Required Not Required Siddha and Required Unani drugs, given in 158B as referred in 3(a)
2. (B) Any As per text As per text Not Required Not Required change in Required dosage form of Ayurveda, Siddha and Unani drugs as described in Section 3(a) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940
3. (C) Ayurveda, As per text New Not If Required Required Siddha and Required Unani drugs referred in 3(a) to be used for new indication
12. Learned Amicus Curiae hands over a copy of the Notification dated 04th July, 2018, issued by the Ministry of Ayurveda, Yoga & Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha and Homeopathy (Ayush), Government of India, which watered down the aforesaid Rule and dispensed with clinical trials with new indications and on the aspect of effectiveness and suggested that proof of effectiveness in the form of a Pilot Study may be required for the drugs in question.
13. It is submitted that the aforesaid Notification has diluted the Rules without any amendment thereto, which is impermissible in law. The Notification dated 04th July, 2018 is taken on record and the UOI is directed to respond to the above.
14. Coming to the effective use of the existing penalty mechanism under law, learned Amicus Curiae refers to his note at page 74 and submits that he has drawn out a chart to indicate the limited extent of penal action taken by States and Union Territories under the DMR Act, 1954, The DC Act, 1940 and the CPA Act, 2019. In fact, he states that the affidavits filed by the concerned State Governments shows that in most cases, the penalties imposed are NIL and similarly, the action taken is 9 very poor. Despite the statutes being in place, the State Governments and Union Territories have been taking these provisions quite lightly.
15. All the State Governments/Union Territories are directed to explain their inaction/indolence in imposing penalties and deterrents for compliances of the statutes, wherever required.
16. Further, except for the States of Jharkhand, Goa, NCT of Delhi, Odisha and West Bengal, none of the other States are following the practice of granting prior approval of the advertisements before issuance of licence so as to ensure that there is proper labeling and no mismatch. All the State Governments/Union Territories, except those mentioned above, shall respond to the aforesaid aspect highlighted by the learned Amicus Curiae within two weeks.
17. Learned Amicus Curiae points out that there is a strong need for centralized lifting of complaints. Earlier, the Ministry of Consumer Affairs, UOI had entered into an MOU with Advertising Standard Council of India (ASCI) to monitor misleading advertisements through the misleading advertisements portal (GAMMA), but the said MOU came to an end in April, 2020. During the years 2018 to 2022, 2573 complaints related to the health sector were registered, out of which 2505 were resolved. The partnership between the Ministry of Consumer Affairs and ASCI helped in increasing the number of complaints in view of the positive response received from the Department.
18. We have been informed that now the Ministry of Consumer Affairs has set up a National Consumer Helpline Portal and the GAMMA Portal has been integrated with the aforesaid Portal. The affidavit filed by the Ministry of Consumer Affairs reflects that in a period of two years, from April, 2022 to May, 2024, only 132 complaints in the health sector were received, out of which 116 complaints have been disposed. The number of complaints received itself is abysmally low, what to speak of the disposal. Fact of the matter is that the complaints which were over 2500 between April, 2018 and 2022, have dwindled to 132. This itself speaks volumes about the manner in which the Ministry has been operating the website bringing the aforesaid website to the notice of the public at large for them to utilize the services offered.10
19. It is stated by learned Amicus Curiae that unlike ASCI that used to voluntarily undertake due diligence and take action on noticing any noncompliance, the website of the Ministry only focusses on the complaints received and does not take any initiative on its own to identify the problems faced by the consumers and tackle the misleading advertisements, issued by various parties, which is why the number of complaints received are so very poor.
20. The aforesaid aspect needs to be seriously examined by the Ministry of Consumer Affairs. A specific response shall be furnished within two weeks.
21. As for the need for effective inter-state coordination, highlighted by the learned Amicus Curiae, we find that there is merit in the aforesaid submission particularly, in the light of the data furnished by such of the States Governments/Union Territories, who have filed their affidavits. It appears from the said data collated by learned Amicus Curiae that in some states, i.e., in the case of State of Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, NCT of Delhi and West Bengal, a large number of complaints were forwarded to other States for the reason that the manufacturing units in respect of which complaints were received, were operating within the concerned State/Union Territories. But no data has been furnished by the receiving States of the complaints as to the action taken on the complaints received. This leaves the consumer feeling helpless and completely in the dark regarding the action taken on the reports in response to the complaints forwarded to the receiving States.
22. We are of the opinion that the Ministry of Ayush, UOI must set up a dashboard for all the States to furnish details of the complaints received by them and referred to another State Licensing Authority for appropriate action and the action taken by the concerned State Licensing Authority so that the data comes in public domain and can be accessed by the consumers. The aforesaid dashboard would also help in dealing with prosecutions under the DC Act in as much as lack of information on the action taken is a big deterrent for prosecution purposes and needs to be addressed on priority. Creation of a dashboard would help in addressing the aforesaid aspect as well.11
23. The aforesaid issue shall be addressed by all the concerned State Governments/Union Territories and the Central Government and fresh affidavits shall be filed within two weeks.
24. Mr. K.M. Nataraj, Learned Additional Solicitor General submits that several applications for intervention have been filed in the present case.
Having perused the same, it is his submission that IA Nos. 110768/2024 and 110769/2024 are extraneous to the issues raised before this Court and may not be entertained.
25. As none is present on behalf of the applicants in the aforesaid applications, appropriate orders shall be passed on the next date.
26. As for the remaining applications, learned counsel for the petitioner has furnished a consolidated list of the applications along with the prayers made. The same are taken on record. Orders on these applications are deferred for the Central Government to file an affidavit placing on record the recommendations made pursuant to the joint meeting conducted with various stakeholders.
xx xxx xxx”
7. Learned Amicus Curiae submitted that as a result, the said Rule is still in force and various compliances have been made pursuant to the said Rule by the respective States/Union Territories. In the circumstances, the writ petition may be continued to serve the subsequent expanded purposes, even though the original purpose for which the writ petition was filed may have been served.
8. We have extracted the prayers made in the writ petition above.
By various orders passed by this Court on different dates, the prayers sought for by the petitioners in this writ petition have been achieved inasmuch as the reliefs have been granted by this Court or they do not survive for further consideration. In the 12 circumstances, we find that no object and purpose would be served in considering the writ petition any further. Hence, the writ petition stands disposed of.
9. However, liberty is reserved to the parties/intervention applicants to seek relief in accordance with law if they have any grievance with regard to the omission of Rule 170. Consequently, interim order dated 27.08.2024 stands vacated.
10. All contentions on both sides are left open to be advanced in appropriate proceeding that may be taken up by any of the parties herein, if so advised.
11. Pending application(s) including the application(s) for intervention/impleadment shall also stand disposed of.
12. We place on record our sincere appreciation of the services rendered by Shri Shadan Farasat, learned Amicus Curiae, to this Court.
WRIT PETITION (C) NO. 400/2025
13. The facts in brief are that the Petitioners, who represent various stakeholders in the Ayurvedic, Siddha or Unani Drugs industry, have filed the instant writ petition being aggrieved by the insertion of Rule 170 to the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945 by way of the Drugs and Cosmetics (11 th Amendment) Rules, 2018.
According to them the said Rule prohibits manufacturers of Ayurvedic, Siddha and Unani drugs from publishing any advertisement referring to any drug in terms that suggest that the drug may 13 diagnose, cure, mitigate, treat or prevent any disease. The Petitioners claim the impugned Rule 170 violates their fundamental rights under Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 301 of the Constitution of India.
14. They have sought the following reliefs:
“A. Declare that the Impugned Rules i.e. Drugs and Cosmetics (11th Amendment) Rules, 2018, are unconstitutional and void ab-initio being ultra vires the Constitution of India, violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 301 of the Constitution of India and also ultra vires the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1945;
B. Issue a writ of certiorari or writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or directions under Article 32 of the Constitution of India striking down the Impugned Rules Drugs and Cosmetics (11th Amendment) Rules, 2018 as being ultra vires the Constitution of India, violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 301 of the Constitution of India and also ultra vires the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1945; and C. Pending hearing and final disposal of the present petition, this Hon’ble Court be pleased to stay the effect, operating and implementation of the Impugned Rules i.e. Drugs and Cosmetics (11th Amendment) Rules, 2018;
D. Pass such further or other order as to this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts of the instant case.”
15. Liberty is reserved to the petitioners herein or any other parties similarly situated to seek the aforesaid reliefs or any other related reliefs before the appropriate Forum, in accordance with law.
1416. In view of the order passed in Writ Petition (C) No. 645/2022, we dispose of this writ petition reserving liberty to the petitioners herein to seek remedies, if any, in accordance with law, if so advised.
Pending application(s) shall also stand disposed of.
……………………………………………………………J. [B.V. NAGARATHNA] ……………………………………………………………J. [K.V. VISWANATHAN] NEW DELHI;
AUGUST 11, 2025.
15 ITEM NO.42 COURT NO.5 SECTION X
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). 645/2022
INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION & ANR. Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s)
[FOR REPORTING COMPLIANCE]........
1. MR. SHADAN FARASAT, LEARNED ADVOCATE WILL ASSIST THE COURT AS AN AMICUS CURIAE
2. MR. MURSALIN ASIJIT SHAIKH, APPLICANT-IN-PERSON WILL APPEAR IN I.A. D.NO. 95540 OF 2024 (APPLICATION FOR INTERVENTION) 3. IA No. 110039/2024 - APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION IA No. 110769/2024 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 133550/2024 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 140252/2024 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 110011/2024 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 132998/2024 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 139081/2024 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 130554/2022 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 137201/2024 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 143229/2024 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 234824/2024 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 142959/2024 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 187046/2024 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 171013/2024 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 159883/2024 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 117836/2024 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 155193/2024 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 133899/2024 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 110768/2024 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 95540/2024 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 139085/2024 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 13659/2023 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 133673/2024 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 133537/2024 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 133534/2024 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 139082/2024 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 166475/2024 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 132997/2024 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 188151/2024 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES IA No. 139206/2024 - PERMISSION TO FILE APPLICATION FOR DIRECTION IA No. 166477/2024 - PERMISSION TO FILE APPLICATION FOR DIRECTION WITH W.P.(C) No. 400/2025 (X) 16 FOR ADMISSION IA No. 102215/2025 - EX-PARTE STAY Date : 11-08-2025 These matters were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V. NAGARATHNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.V. VISWANATHAN Mr. Shadan Farasat, Sr. Adv. (Amicus Curiae) Mr. Abhishek Babbar, Adv. Ms. Natasha Maheshwari, Adv.
For Petitioner(s) :Mr. Prabhas Bajaj, Adv.
Mr. Amarjeet Singh, AOR Mr. Priyanshu Tyagi, Adv.
Mr. Prashant Pakhiddey, Adv. Mr. Manav Gill, Adv.
Ms. Mrinal Kanwar, AOR Mr. Vaibhav Rajsingh Rathore, Adv.
For Respondent(s) :Mr. Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General Ms. Archana Pathak Dave, A.S.G. Mr. Sudarshan Lamba, AOR Mr. Mayank Pandey, Adv. Mr. Bhuvan Kapoor, Adv. Ms. Sansriti Pathak, Adv. Mr. Vishnu Jain, Adv.
Ms. Avni Singh, Adv.
Mr. Jitin Chaturvedi, AOR Mr. Amrish Kumar, AOR Mr. Balbir Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Simranjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Gautam Talukdar, AOR Ms. Apurbaa Dutta, Adv. Mr. Naman Tandon, Adv.
Ms. Vanshaja Shukla, AOR Ms. Ankeeta Appanna, Adv. Mr. Siddhant Yadav, Adv. Ms. Anubha Dhulia, Adv.
Mr. Gaurav Sharma, Sr. Adv. Mr. Prateek Bhatia, AOR Mr. Dhawal Mohan, Adv.
Mr. Paranjay Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Rajesh Raj, Adv.17
Mr. Guntur Pramod Kumar, AOR Ms. Prerna Singh, Adv.
Mr. Dhruv Yadav, Adv.
Ms. Disha Singh, AOR Ms. Eliza Bar, Adv.
Mr. Chinmoy Pradip Sharma, Sr. A.A.G. Ms. Diksha Rai, AOR Ms. Nimisha Menon, Adv. Ms. Purvat Wali, Adv.
Mr. Piyush Vyas, Adv.
Mr. Irfan Hasieb, Adv.
Mr. Vijay Deora, Adv.
Mr. Aditya Agarwal, Adv.
Mr. Anshul Narayan, Addl. Standing Counsel, Adv. Mrs. Vineeta Singh, Adv. Mr. Ashutosh Chaturvedi, Adv. Mr. Prem Prakash, AOR Ms. Ankita Sharma, AOR Mr. Arjun D. Singh, Adv. Ms. Ishika Neagi, Adv.
Mr. Abhay Anil Anturkar, Adv. Mr. Dhruv Tank, Adv.
Mr. Aniruddha Awalgaonkar, Adv. Ms. Surbhi Kapoor, AOR Mr. Sarthak Mehrotra,, Adv. Mr. Bhagwant Deshpande, Adv. Ms. Subhi Pastor, Adv.
Ms. Swati Ghildiyal, AOR Ms. Abhipsa Mohanty, Adv.
Mr. Lokesh Sinhal, Sr. A.A.G. Mr. Samar Vijay Singh, AOR Mr. Nikunj Gupta, Adv.
Ms. Sabarni Som, Adv.
Ms. Aakanksha, Adv.
Mr. Aman Dev Sharma, Adv. Ms. Ishika Gupta, Adv.
Mr. Gaj Singh, Adv.
Mr. Kartikeya Rastogi, DAG Ms. Inderdeep Kaur Raina, Adv. Mr. Akshay Girish Ringe, AOR Ms. Pallavi Langar, AOR Mr. Manoj Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Kumar Anurag Singh, Adv.18
Mr. Honey Khanna, Adv.
Mr. Sujeet Kumar Chaubey, Adv.
Mr. D. L. Chidananda, AOR Mr. Nishe Rajen Shonker, AOR Ms. Anu K Joy, Adv.
Mr. Alim Anvar, Adv.
Mr. Santhosh K, Adv.
Mrs. Devika A.l., Adv.
Mr. Harmeet Singh Ruprah, D.A.G. Ms. Mrinal Gopal Elker, AOR Mr. Saurabh Singh, Adv. Ms. Chhavi Khandelwal, Adv.
Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv. 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. Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar, AOR Mr. Karun Sharma, Adv.
Ms. Anupama Ngangom, Adv. Ms. Rajkumari Divyasana, Adv.
Mr. Avijit Mani Tripathi, AOR Mr. Vikas Bansal, Adv.
Mr. T.k. Nayak, Adv.
Ms. Marbiang Khongwir, Adv.
Mr. Anando Mukherjee, AOR Mr. Shwetank Singh, Adv.
Ms. K. Enatoli Sema, AOR Mr. Amit Kumar Singh, Adv. Ms. Chubalemla Chang, Adv. Mr. Prang Newmai, Adv.
Mr. Pitambar Acharya, Sr. Adv. Mr. Srisatya Mohanty , AOR Mr. Abhijit Pattanaik, Adv.
Ms. Nupur Kumar, AOR Mr. Shiv Mangal Sharma, A.A.G. Ms. Abhinandini Sharma, Adv. Ms. Saubhagya Sundriyal, Adv.19
Ms. Nidhi Jaswal, AOR Mr. Sameer Abhyankar, AOR Ms. Ripul Swati Kumari, Adv. Mr. Krishna Rastogi, Adv.
Mr. Amit Anand Tiwari AAG, Sr. Adv. Ms. Misha Rohatgi, AOR Mr. Nakul Mohta, Adv.
Mr. Amulya Upadhyay, Adv. Mr. Ayush Kashyap, Adv. Ms. Tanvi Anand, Adv.
Mr. Sravan Kumar Karanam, AOR Ms. M. Harshini, Adv.
Mr. Kumar Nikhil, Adv.
Mr. Shuvodeep Roy, AOR Mr. Deepayan Dutta, Adv. Mr. Saurabh Tripathi, Adv.
Mrs. Garima Prasad, Sr. A.A.G. Ms. Sakshi Kakkar, AOR Mr. Kunal Mimani, AOR Mr. Prashant Alai, Adv.
Mr. G.M.Kawoosa, Adv.
Mr. Pashupathi Nath Razdan, AOR Mr. Aravindh S., AOR Ms. Jyoti P, Adv.
Mr. Tushar Mehta Ld, Solicitor General Ms. Archana Pathak Dave Ld, A.S.G. Mr. Mayank Pandey, Adv. Mr. Bhuvan Kapoor, Adv. Ms. Sansriti Pathak, Adv. Mr. Vishnu Shankar Jain, Adv. Mr. Kanu Agrawal, Adv.
Mrs. Indira Bhakar, Adv. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Verma, Adv. Mr. Varun Chugh, Adv.
Mr. Vatsal Joshi, Adv.
Mr. Shashwat Parihar, Adv. Mr. Rajesh Singh Chauhan, Adv. Mr. Piyush Beriwal, Adv. Mr. Tadimalla Bhaskar Gowtham, Adv. Mr. Shreekant Neelappa Terdal, AOR Mr. Harish Pandey, Adv. Mr. Vineet Singh, Adv.20
Mr. Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General Mrs. Archana Pathak Dave, A.S.G. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR Mr. Mayank Pandey, Adv. Mr. Bhuvan Kapoor, Adv. Ms. Sansriti Pathak, Adv. Mr. Vishnu Jain, Adv.
Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, Sr. Adv. Mr. R Jawaharlal, Adv.
Ms. Meghna Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Sayyam Maheshwari, Adv. Mr. Cecil C George, Adv. Mr. Mayank Kshirsagar, AOR Mrs. Anumita Verma, Adv.
Mr. Vikas Mehta, AOR Mr. Vivek Reddy, Sr. Adv. Mr. Basa Mithun Shashank, Adv. Ms. Anjali, Adv.
Pival K Peddireddi, Adv.
M/S. Khaitan & Co., AOR Mr. Ankur Sangal, Adv.
Mrs. Sucheta Roy, Adv.
Mr. Ankit Arvind, Adv.
Ms. Amrit Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Karun Mehta, Adv.
Ms. Pratiksha Mishra, Adv. Mr. Shreyas Edupuganti, Adv. Mr. Karan Bhootra, Adv.
Mr. Rakesh Sinha, Adv.
Mr. Anand Srivastava, Adv. Mr. Aashish Srivastava, Adv. Ms. Deepti Bhardwaj, Adv. Ms. Shweta Singh Parihar, AOR Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Mr. S. S. Shroff, AOR Ms. Aparajita Jamwal, Adv. Mr. Shashank Mishra, Adv. Ms. Akshi Rastogi, Adv. Ms. Vedika Rathore, Adv. Ms. Rithika Mathur, Adv.
Ms. Rajkumari Banju, AOR Ms. Mrinmoi Chatterjee , AOR M/S. Karanjawala & Co., AOR Mr. Debmalya Banerjee, Adv. Mr. Rohan Sharma, Adv.21
Ms. Liza Vohra, Adv.
Ms. Ayshwarya Chandar, AOR Mr. Mayank Mishra, Adv.
Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv. 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. Pranav Sachdeva, Adv. Ms. Neha Rathi, AOR Ms. Kajal Giri, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The writ petitions stand disposed of in terms of the signed order.
All pending application(s) including the application(s) for intervention/impleadment shall also stand disposed of.
(NEETU SACHDEVA) (DIVYA BABBAR) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH) (Signed order is placed on the file) 22