Based on the proceedings, the Supreme Court has issued a series of substantive directions in a long-pending writ petition. The legal focus is on monitoring compliance with these judicial mandates, with the Court retaining continuing jurisdiction. The matter is scheduled for a future hearing specifically to review the implementation of its orders and assess further progress.
Facts Of The Case:
Based on the provided court proceeding document, which is a record of the pronouncement of an order and not the full case file, the specific facts and history of the case are not detailed. However, the document header identifies it as Writ Petition (Civil) No. 295 of 2012, filed by S. Rajaseekaran against the Union of India and Others.The case is categorized under “PIL-W”, indicating it was filed as a Public Interest Litigation. The nature of the grievance is not explicitly stated in this excerpt. The document records that after a prolonged period of 13 years since filing, a Supreme Court bench comprising Justices J.B. Pardiwala and K.V. Viswanathan, with Senior Advocate Gaurav Agrawal serving as an Amicus Curiae (friend of the court), has now pronounced a final order containing various directions. The Court has taken a proactive step by directing its Registry to list the matter again after seven months specifically to monitor compliance with its directives and track further progress. Additionally, on the request of a respondent’s counsel, the Court has agreed to urgently list two specific Interim Applications (IAs) on a near-future date. This suggests that while the main order has been passed, certain ancillary or urgent issues sought by the respondents remain to be addressed.
Procedural History:
The procedural history of this case begins with the filing of Writ Petition (Civil) No. 295 of 2012 as a Public Interest Litigation (PIL). After a protracted period of 13 years, the case was heard by a Supreme Court bench comprising Justices J.B. Pardiwala and K.V. Viswanathan, with Senior Advocate Gaurav Agrawal appointed as Amicus Curiae to assist the court. The bench pronounced a reportable order containing various substantive directions on October 7, 2025. In a significant move for continuous judicial monitoring, the Court has retained jurisdiction, directing the Registry to re-list the matter after seven months to ensure compliance with its directives and assess progress. Furthermore, on the same day, upon a specific mention by a respondent’s counsel, the Court allowed the urgent listing of two pending Interim Applications (IA No. 43387/2025 and IA No. 119142/2024), scheduling them for a hearing on November 17, 2025.