SURESH SRIVASTAVA & ORS. versus SUNDEEP BHUTORIA

SURESH SRIVASTAVA & ORS. versus SUNDEEP BHUTORIA

The Supreme Court annulled paragraph 17 of the impugned High Court order because permitting the respondent (a disputant) to assist the Court in the role of an amicus was incompatible with the non-adversarial requirements of a PIL; the Court declined to interfere with the High Court's decision to register the PIL from paragraph 11 onwards and left the matter open for examination by the High Court with the assistance of an independently appointed amicus curiae in terms of paragraph 18.

Parties
Appellants: SURESH SRIVASTAVA & ORS.; Respondent: SUNDEEP BHUTORIA
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
21 March 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Leave Granted; Appeal Disposed at This Stage
Outcome
Appeal disposed; paragraph 17 of the impugned High Court order annulled; matter remitted to High Court to be dealt with as a PIL with assistance of an amicus curiae.
Legal Topics
Registration of PIL, Non Adversarial Nature of PIL, Role of Disputant Versus Amicus, Annulment of High Court Order
Public Interest Litigation Civil Procedure Amicus Curiae Appellate Practice Registration of PIL Non Adversarial Nature of PIL Role of Disputant Versus Amicus Annulment of High Court Order

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SURESH SRIVASTAVA & ORS.

Appellants

SUNDEEP BHUTORIA

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Leave Granted; Appeal Disposed at This Stage

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court may permit a disputant to act as amicus curiae in a PIL
  2. 2 Whether a matter registered as a PIL ought to be dealt with as non-adversarial litigation
  3. 3 Whether paragraph 17 of the impugned High Court order should be annulled

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court annulled paragraph 17 of the impugned High Court order because permitting the respondent (a disputant) to assist the Court in the role of an amicus was incompatible with the non-adversarial requirements of a PIL; the Court declined to interfere with the High Court's decision to register the PIL from paragraph 11 onwards and left the matter open for examination by the High Court with the assistance of an independently appointed amicus curiae in terms of paragraph 18.

Court Disposition

Appeal disposed; paragraph 17 of the impugned High Court order annulled; matter remitted to High Court to be dealt with as a PIL with assistance of an amicus curiae.

Orders

  • Paragraph 17 of impugned order dated 17.02.2022 annulled
  • Matter to be dealt with as a Public Interest Litigation and left open for examination by the High Court