The Supreme Court highlighted the importance of a unified stand when a ‘single litigant’ represents the state in legal proceedings. This approach aims to eliminate contradictions and conflicting stands that may arise when multiple representatives speak on behalf of the state. By ensuring consistency in legal arguments, the court seeks to enhance the efficiency of judicial processes and uphold the credibility of the state’s position in legal matters.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court emphasized that the State regarded as a “single litigant” in court proceedings and must present a unified position after consulting all relevant departments.
This observation made by a bench led by Justice B.R. Gavai while addressing a case involving disputes between the forest and revenue departments of the Mizoram government regarding a notification from May 1965.
The apex court noted that a single judge of the Gauhati High Court’s Aizawl bench, in January 2021, ruled that the notification published in the Assam Gazette on May 19, 1965 declaring forests along the Tuirial River and 15 other rivers as Council Reserved Forests was “not sustainable in law.”
The Supreme Court observed that the state had previously filed an appeal before a division bench of the Gauhati High Court, but on November 9, 2022, sought permission to withdraw the appeal with the option to file a new one, if necessary.
The apex court took note of submissions from various parties, including the state of Mizoram and the National Highways and Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited (NHIDCL), highlighting that the single judge’s ruling was causing significant issues. They argued that restoring the appeal and deciding it on its merits in accordance with the law would be the most appropriate course of action.
The bench stated,
“Considering the substantial implications of the single judge’s order from the Gauhati High Court and the potential ripple effects on various issues, such as highway construction and citizens’ rights, we believe it is proper to restore the writ appeal and related matters to their original files, to be adjudicated based on their merits,”
The bench, which also included Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice K.V. Viswanathan, deemed it appropriate for the Supreme Court to invoke its extraordinary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to restore the appeal to the division bench of the Gauhati High Court.
While reinstating the appeal, the bench remarked,
“Considering the significance of the issue, we urge the High Court to resolve the appeal as quickly as possible, and in any event, within a period of three months from today.”
The bench noted that in July, it stayed the single judge’s judgment from the high court, and that stay order would remain in effect until the appeal is resolved.
The court observed in its order issued last week,
“There appear to be some disputes between the forest and revenue departments of the Mizoram government,”
The bench reiterated,
“We have emphasized repeatedly that, for the courts, the State is considered a single litigant, and it must present a unified stance after consulting all concerned departments.”
The Supreme Court also suggested that the chief secretary of Mizoram convene a meeting with the secretaries of the revenue and forest departments to address the issue.
The court stated,
“We urge this to be done as quickly as possible to ensure that critical development projects in the area are not delayed,”