Supreme Court Recaptions 40-Year Old M.C. Mehta Case To End Unending Saga Of Pending Applications

In a procedural cleanup, the Supreme Court has closed the 1985 M.C. Mehta v. Union of India writ petition to eliminate the misleading impression that the case has remained undecided for over 40 years.

The Court observed that while the original case involved a "continuous mandamus" to control pollution, the constant stream of Interlocutory Applications (IAs) had created a statistical logjam. The Bench has transitioned the matter into a Suo Motu proceeding specifically titled "Issues of Air Pollution in NCR."

The Bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Vipul Pancholi ordered, "All Interlocutory Applications pending as of now are directed to be registered as Writ Petitions, and each Interlocutory Application may be assigned a separate Writ Petition Number. For case management and consequential disposal of pending Interlocutory Applications, recommendations made by the Ld. Amicus are accepted. Consequently, the following directions are issued: (i) AoRs in pending IAs shall inform us as to whether the respective applications have become infructuous. If not, they are directed to assign a reason, failing which it will be deemed as infructuous. AoR shall inform Registry within 2 weeks. Ld. Amicus is also requested to independently identify IAs which have become infructuous. (ii) All applications. requiring consideration on merits shall be assigned separate writ nos. They shall be further sub-categorised."

Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati appeared for the CAQM, and Senior Advocate Aparajita Singh appeared as Amicus Curiae.

The Court ordered, "On the previous date, parties were ad idem that this is high time when the proceedings, purportedly of 1985, ought to be formally disposed of. It was suggested that the Writ Petition should be aptly recaptioned. Suggestion supported by stakeholders. We formally disposed of the Writ Petition No. 13029/1985. Interlocutory Application or Misc Application shall hitherto be entertained by the Registry in that matter. Instead, Registry shall register suo motu proceedings Ine Re: Issues of Air Pollution in NCR."

The Court directed that all currently pending IAs be converted into independent Writ Petitions, each assigned its own unique case number. Advocates on Record (AoRs) have been given a two-week deadline to inform the Registry whether their specific applications are still relevant; failure to provide a valid reason for pendency will result in the applications being deemed "infructuous" and dismissed.

Finally, the Court emphasized the need for transparency and preparedness among state stakeholders. The Commission for Air Quality Management (CAQM), along with the governments of Delhi, Haryana, Uttar Pradesh, and Rajasthan, must now circulate their compliance reports to all parties well in advance of hearings.

Previously, the Court 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 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.

Cause Title: MC Mehta v. Union of India [WP (C) 13029/1985]