Interim Orders and the Limits of Article 142: Safeguarding Natural Justice Balancing Judicial Powers and Litigants' Rights

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e exercise of judicial superintendence, the basic structure of the Constitution , and the limitations on the Supreme Court's power under Article 142 of the Constitution . Arguments Presented The primary arguments presented in the case revolved around the following points: Whether the directions issued in the Asian Resurfacing case, which provided for the automatic vacation of interim stay orders granted by High Courts after a specific period, were valid and in accordance with the principles of natural justice. Whether the Supreme Court, in exercising its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution , can interfere with the jurisdiction conferred on the High Courts under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution . Whether the Supreme Cour .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d after hearing all concerned parties. The Court emphasized that constitutional courts should refrain from fixing time-bound schedules for the disposal of cases pending before other courts in the ordinary course. Such directions should be issued only in exceptional circumstances. Analysis and Decision by the Court Based on the discussions and findings, the Supreme Court arrived at the following conclusions and decisions: The Court held that a direction for the automatic expiration of all interim orders of stay of proceedings passed by every High Court, solely by reason of the lapse of time, cannot be issued in the exercise of the jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution . The Court outlined important parameters for the exercise of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... directions issued in the Asian Resurfacing case, which provided for the automatic vacation of interim stay orders granted by High Courts after a specific period. The Court held that such blanket directions cannot be issued in the exercise of the jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution , as it would interfere with the substantive rights of litigants and the principles of natural justice. The Court emphasized that the power under Article 142 cannot be exercised to nullify the benefits derived by litigants based on validly passed judicial orders when they are not parties to the proceedings before the Supreme Court. Additionally, the Court clarified that constitutional courts should refrain from fixing time-bound schedules for the d .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X