Supreme Court To Recaption 40 Years Old Pending MC Mehta Cases Appearing As 'Pending' Due To Filing Of IAs

The Supreme Court has asked the officers and the counsels to recaption the three landmark MC Mehta cases, which have been pending for more than 40 years.

The Court observed that famous Public Interest Litigations (PILs) from 1984 and 1985—long since decided—are appearing as "pending" due to the constant filing of Interlocutory Applications (IAs) and Miscellaneous Applications (MAs).

The Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice Vipul M Pancholi ordered, "It appears to us that multiple matters are shown as pending as MC Mehta. The 1984 case was decided decades ago, and till now, MAs and IAs are filed in such a manner that it shows as if the case is pending. Another MC Mehta case of 1985 i.e. Writ Petition (C) no.4677/1985, in this matter too, several IAs filed from time to time. This was also decided, and is shown as alive due to IAs and MAs. Another pending plea is the Taj Trapezium matter. Let these three matters be listed on three different dates and let the IAs be listed on the respective the dates...The court officers shall inform us as to how these cases should be recaptioned so that the main cases are not kept alive. Let the identification of cases also be done so that, if possible, cases can be transferred to the High Court. No further IA shall be filed in the 1985 matter."

The CJI noted that this creates an embarrassing public and parliamentary perception that the Court has failed to resolve cases from 1984 and 1985.

"What is happening in this court? IA after IA is being filed in this court. MC Mehta alone has 85 pending ones. Then someone will ask the parliament how many cases are pending before us. I will not go through such embarrassment...", CJI Kant said.

The core of the issue lies in the constant filing of Interlocutory Applications (IAs) and Miscellaneous Applications (MAs) under the original 1984 and 1985 writ petition numbers. While the primary legal issues in these cases were settled long ago, the continuous stream of monitoring applications has kept the original cases technically "alive." The CJI pointed out that M.C. Mehta alone has 85 such pending applications, leading to a situation where the court’s backlog appears artificially inflated.

To rectify this, the Bench has ordered that three major clusters of M.C. Mehta matters, including the Taj Trapezium case, be listed on three separate dates. Court officers and counsel have been directed to propose a "re-captioning" strategy.