Constitution · India · PART V · CHAPTER IV — The Union Judiciary

Article 142 Constitution Enforcement of decrees and orders of the Supreme Court and orders as to discovery, etc.

The Constitution of India · Edition: Supplied Law Library page: pocket edition attributed to Legislative Department, as on 10 September 2026; imported 6 November 2026

(1) The Supreme Court in the exercise of its jurisdiction may pass such decree or make such order as is necessary for doing complete justice in any cause or matter pending before it, and any decree so passed or order so made shall be enforceable throughout the territory of India in such manner as may be prescribed by or under any law made by Parliament and, until provision in that behalf is so made, in such manner as the President may by order¹prescribe.

(2) Subject to the provisions of any law made in this behalf by Parliament, the Supreme Court shall, as respects the whole of the territory of India, have all and every power to make any order for the purpose of securing the attendance of any person, the discovery or production of any documents, or the investigation or punishment of any contempt of itself.

Comments

Service LawThough the appointment survived quo warranto because the appointee held UGC-NET, the Court could not ignore prima facie evidence that the Ph.D. he relied on was forged, and directed a full inquiry with the awarding university’s records; if forged, the appointment falls and prosecution may follow. — Annu Kumar v. Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak, 2026 INSC 968.

Service LawThe invalidation of a Tokre Koli tribe certificate was upheld, but for an engineer who served over 30 years without blemish, with no children and no family member benefited, service was protected under Article 142 only for computing retiral and pension benefits, without validating the caste claim. — Shirish Pandharinath Patil v. State of Maharashtra, 2026 INSC 949.

Criminal LawTo stop foreign accused in NDPS commercial-quantity cases absconding on fake sureties, binding directions were issued: passport deposited in court, FRRO registration within a week, two solvent sureties verified within three working days with a lien on their property, disclosure of finances, notice to the embassy, a central database and portals for verification, action against officials who pass fake sureties, and a new Form 47A under the BNSS. — Union of India v. Chidiebere Kingsley Nawchara, 2026 INSC 870.

Service LawA civil court cannot decree reinstatement in service, Section 14 of the Specific Relief Act limiting the remedy to damages. For a constable discharged merely because criminal proceedings were pending, the Court awarded Rs. 5 lakh in lieu of reinstatement under Article 142. — Spo/Constable IRB Satpal Singh v. State of Punjab, 2026 INSC 798.

Education LawArticle 142 is not applied mechanically, and the Court would not use it to shield teachers appointed irregularly or unlawfully at the cost of students and fair public recruitment. — Najma Khatun v. State of West Bengal, 2026 INSC 691.

Civil ProcedureAlthough a Motor Vehicles Act claim was not strictly proper as the vehicle did not directly cause the accident, the Court used Article 142 to spare a paraplegic victim further litigation and raised compensation to Rs. 25 lakh with interest. — Commissioner, Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike v. K.K. Umesh Kumar, 2026 INSC 637.

Insolvency LawArticle 142 cannot dilute the IBC’s limitation periods, even for a liquidator acting for stakeholders; having obtained condonation once before the NCLAT, a party cannot expect it again at each stage. — CA Ramchandra Dallaram Choudhary v. Adani Infrastructure and Developers, 2026 INSC 629.

Family LawThe Court may dissolve a marriage for irretrievable breakdown under Article 142(1) though no statutory ground exists, where it is convinced the marriage is dead; separation of over 15 years, failed mediation and two independent doctors without children made this such a case. — Sonal Talpada v. Veerbhan Singh, 2026 INSC 620.

Criminal LawDelay in pronouncing reserved judgments violates Article 21, especially for those in custody, and binding guidelines were issued to all High Courts on timely pronouncement and uploading. — Pila Pahan @ Peela Pahan v. State of Jharkhand, 2026 INSC 604.

Education LawTo avoid sudden displacement of serving teachers and disruption to pupils, the time to pass the TET was extended from two to three years, to 31 August 2028, and States were asked to hold the test periodically, preferably twice a year. — State of U.P. v. Anjuman Ishaat-E-Taleem Trust, 2026 INSC 597.

Human RightsArticle 142 is wide but cannot supplant express statutory provisions grounded in fundamental policy; it may mould relief and fill gaps where law is silent. Directions protecting sensitive institutional areas from stray dogs supplement and operationalise the statutory scheme rather than override it. — In Re: City Hounded by Strays, Kids Pay Price v. State of Andhra Pradesh, 2026 INSC 506.

Education LawWhen students of a derecognised medical college are shifted to other private colleges through supervised counselling, the resulting fee burden must be shared equitably. — Soumya Ranjan Panda v. Subhalaxmi Dash, 2026 INSC 488.

Administrative LawFor a 2016 mis-declaration of faculty attendance, given ten years’ lapse, the doctor’s age of 76 and the stay throughout, the three-month removal from the medical register was reduced to censure. — Dr. Nigam Prakash Narain v. National Medical Commission, 2026 INSC 453.

Service LawHaryana’s June 2014 regularisation notifications were valid, covering staff on sanctioned posts with the requisite qualifications left out of the 1996 policy, whose appointments were irregular, not illegal. The July 2014 notifications, regularising those engaged without advertisement and using a future cut-off, were arbitrary, but those already benefited were protected at the lowest admissible pay scale. — Madan Singh v. State of Haryana, 2026 INSC 379.

Labour LawArticle 142 cannot be used to regularise serious illegalities, such as unauthorised sale of a sick company’s assets during litigation; this was no mere ironing out of creases. — Bhartiya Mazdoor Sangh v. State of U.P., 2026 INSC 364.

Family LawAfter the husband had paid Rs. 89 lakh and returned jewellery under a mediated settlement, the wife withdrew consent alleging unrecorded promises of far larger sums, without proving fraud or coercion. That showed irretrievable breakdown, and divorce was granted. — Dhananjay Rathi v. Ruchika Rathi, 2026 INSC 360.

Family LawA decade of litigation, including over 80 proceedings by an advocate husband against his wife, her family and her lawyers, showed a dead marriage. It was dissolved and all pending proceedings between them, including FIRs and Bar Council complaints, were quashed. — XXX v. YYY, 2026 INSC 334.

Service LawACRs of women officers commissioned in 2010-12 were written assuming they had no career beyond 14 years, so they got average grades while men got outstanding ones. That structural disadvantage cannot be cured by anonymising data at the final stage of assessment for permanent commission. — Lt Col Pooja Pal v. Union of India, 2026 INSC 281.

Family LawA marriage of 65 days’ cohabitation followed by a decade of separation and litigation was dissolved under Article 142 despite one spouse’s opposition. — Neha Lal v. Abhishek Kumar, 2026 INSC 73.

Education LawStudent suicide is the tip of a wider crisis, and institutions cannot blame student autonomy to avoid responsibility. Mandatory directions required FIRs and police reporting of student suicides, separate NCRB data, filling faculty vacancies and clearing scholarship backlogs within four months without barring students meanwhile, compliance with UGC regulations, accessibility audits and professional mental health services. — Amit Kumar v. Union of India, 2026 INSC 62.

Education LawThe High Court rightly ordered admission, but since three years had passed in litigation the Court used Article 142 to admit the student in 2026-27 instead of 2023-24. — Secretary, National Medical Commission v. Sanjana Thakur, Supreme Court, 2026.

Family LawA US divorce decree on irretrievable breakdown, a ground unknown to the Hindu Marriage Act, obtained without the husband’s effective submission, does not bind; serving summons or a postal objection is not participation. Given 18 years’ separation, the Court granted divorce under Article 142. — Kishorekumar Mohan Kale v. Kashmira Kale, Supreme Court, 2026.

Insolvency LawThe NCLAT’s engagement of NBCC to complete 16 stalled Supertech projects was upheld. Homebuyers’ interest in getting homes comes first, the claims of creditors and development authorities waiting for now, and such a mechanism does not violate the IBC. — Apex Heights Pvt. Ltd. v. Ram Kishor Arora, Supreme Court, 2026.

Property LawLandowners who withdrew Section 34 petitions after a High Court struck down Sections 3G and 3J of the National Highways Act were left remediless when that judgment was stayed, so the withdrawal orders were set aside. The Court noted structural unfairness in compensation under the 1956 Act compared with other acquisitions. — Riar Builders Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India, Supreme Court, 2026.

Criminal LawHaving quashed the FIR on a compromise for the other offences, the High Court could not keep the dacoity charge alive when all arose from one inseparable transaction, so the whole FIR was quashed under Article 142. — Prashant Prakash Ratnaparki v. State of Maharashtra, 2025 INSC 1323.

Arbitration LawWhere an award is set aside as patently illegal after 16 years of dispute, sending the parties back to fresh arbitration would be a travesty, and the Court may itself bring the dispute to an end under Article 142. — Lancor Holdings v. Prem Kumar Menon, 2025 INSC 1277.

Criminal LawAlthough heinous offences are not ordinarily quashed on compromise, the convictions under the IPC (Section 366) and POCSO (Section 6) were set aside under Article 142 where the appellant had married the victim and they had a child, on condition that he maintain them with dignity for life. — K. Kirubakaran v. State of Tamil Nadu, 2025 INSC 1272.

Criminal LawNo law permits clubbing future FIRs, and earlier consolidation under Article 142 rested on the States’ consent. Later FIRs on the same offence are treated as Section 162 statements, and in multi-State investor frauds clubbing everything in one place is impractical. — Odela Satyam v. State of Telangana, 2025 INSC 1174.

Family LawA Section 498A complaint with vague, general allegations lodged a year after the couple separated was quashed, and the marriage was dissolved under Article 142. — A v. State of Maharashtra, 2025 INSC 926.

Criminal LawArticle 142 cannot reduce a statutory minimum sentence, which would be judicial legislation. Only in rare cases, on unimpeachable proof that a convict is too ill to understand or undergo imprisonment, might the Court waive the prison term. — Dashrath v. State of Maharashtra, 2025 INSC 654.

Insolvency LawJSW Steel’s resolution plan for Bhushan Power and Steel was set aside as violating Section 30(2) IBC, with lapses by the resolution professional and the CoC, and liquidation was ordered under Article 142 to prevent further abuse. — Kalyani Transco v. Bhushan Power and Steel Ltd., 2025 INSC 622.

Arbitration LawA Constitution Bench held that the Supreme Court may cautiously use Article 142 to modify arbitral awards to do complete justice and end long disputes, without revisiting merits or rewriting the award. Viswanathan J. dissented, holding Section 34 the exclusive route. — Gayatri Balasamy v. ISG Novasoft Technologies, 2025 INSC 605; (2025) 7 SCC 1.

Service LawA person who entered service through an illegal appointment cannot invoke Article 142 for equitable relief to keep the post. — Jomon K.K. v. Shajimon P., 2025 INSC 425.

Criminal LawEven after limited notice is issued, the Court may widen the appeal beyond that notice, using Article 142, when substantial justice requires. — Biswajit Das v. Central Bureau of Investigation, 2025 INSC 85.

Consumer LawWide variation, under State rules, in the pay of those presiding over and serving on consumer commissions at State and district level, despite the 2020 Model Rules, prompted the Court to work towards a uniform structure, as adequate pay is needed for the 2019 Act to function. — In Re: Pay and Allowances of Members of the U.P. State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Supreme Court, 2025.

Civil ProcedureWhether a Judge recuses is left to that Judge’s discretion, and Article 142 cannot be used to frame guidelines on it. — Chandraprabha v. Union of India, Supreme Court, 2025.

Family LawOn a mediated settlement, the marriage was dissolved by mutual consent under Article 142 and the jointly owned flat transferred to the wife, who waived alimony. Since the flat formed the subject matter of the case, Section 17(2)(vi) of the Registration Act exempted the decree, so no stamp duty was payable. — Arun Rameshchand Arya v. Parul Singh, Supreme Court, 2025.

Service LawLecturers in a Puducherry polytechnic, serving ad hoc since 2005 with full qualifications while no recruitment was held under the 2006 rules, were ordered regularised under Article 142 without UPSC involvement. Umadevi does not protect an employer who never recruits. Further ad hoc appointments were barred and a CVC probe into illegal appointments was ordered. — Union of India v. K. Velajagan, Supreme Court, 2025.

Criminal LawA 70-year-old who had served most of a six-month sentence, in a clash that was settled and whose cross-case accused got probation, was given the same benefit under Article 142 and the Probation of Offenders Act. — Ramesh v. State of Rajasthan, Supreme Court, 2025.

Criminal LawWhere a dispute was purely civil and showed no intention to cheat, the criminal proceedings were quashed under Article 142. — Raj Reddy Kallem v. State of Haryana, (2024) 8 SCC 588.

Education LawTo end the deadlock over Vice-Chancellor appointments in West Bengal State universities, the Court constituted uniform Search-cum-Selection Committees under Article 142. Disputes between the Chief Minister and the Chancellor over names were to be placed before the Court for final decision. — State of West Bengal v. Dr. Sanat Kumar Ghosh, AIR 2024 SC 3319; (2024) 8 SCC 369.

Civil ProcedureArticle 142 powers to do complete justice stand outside the doctrine of merger and the rule of stare decisis. — Government of NCT of Delhi v. BSK Realtors LLP, (2024) 7 SCC 370.

Criminal LawSince the stalking and intimidation offences were personal and the accused and complainant had since married, the conviction was set aside under Article 142 to protect the marriage. — Dasari Srikanth v. State of Telangana, AIR 2024 SC 2879.

Arbitration LawIn a curative petition, the Court set aside its own earlier judgment that had restored a patently illegal arbitral award, holding that this caused a grave miscarriage of justice. Curative jurisdiction remains exceptional and must not become another layer of review. — Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Ltd. v. Delhi Airport Metro Express Pvt. Ltd., AIR 2024 SC 2070; (2024) 6 SCC 357.

Civil ProcedureAsian Resurfacing’s direction that stays lapse automatically after six months was overruled. Article 142 cannot be used for judicial legislation or to override substantive rights such as the right to be heard. Blanket time limits would curb Article 226, and no litigant should suffer for the court’s delay. Out-of-turn hearing is for the court concerned, and time-bound directions should be exceptional. — High Court Bar Association, Allahabad v. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2024) 6 SCC 267.

Election LawFree and fair elections, including at the local level, are part of the basic structure. Since the presiding officer tampered with ballots in the Chandigarh Mayor election, the Court declared the rightful candidate elected on the valid votes rather than order a fresh poll. — Kuldeep Kumar v. U.T. Chandigarh, (2024) 3 SCC 526.

Service LawGiven the Union’s prolonged failure to fill backlog vacancies for persons with disabilities under the PWD Act, 1995, the Court used Article 142 to direct that a visually impaired candidate be considered for appointment in the IRS or another service. — Union of India v. Pankaj Kumar Srivastava, Supreme Court, 2024.

Family LawA Hindu marriage requires the ceremonies under Section 7 of the Hindu Marriage Act. A registration certificate issued without them is void, so the marriage was declared non-existent. — Dolly Rani v. Manish Kumar Chanchal, Supreme Court, 2024.

Criminal LawCheating was not made out over a defective car, so the prosecution was quashed. The High Court’s direction to replace the car was unjustified, and the Court instead directed BMW to pay Rs. 50 lakh in full settlement. — State of Andhra Pradesh v. BMW India Pvt. Ltd., Supreme Court, 2024.

Criminal LawArticle 142 cannot be used to create offences, such as reintroducing a Section 377 IPC-type provision in the BNS; that is for Parliament. — Pooja Sharma v. Union of India, Supreme Court, 2024.

Contract & Tender LawForfeiting the entire security deposit for an obvious, promptly reported typing error in an e-auction bid, which the system did not allow to be corrected, was punitive. Since the carelessness forced a fresh auction, the bidder was ordered to pay Rs. 3 crore instead. — Omsairam Steels & Alloys Pvt. Ltd. v. Director of Mines and Geology, Supreme Court, 2024.

Family LawDissolving a marriage for irretrievable breakdown under Article 142 is discretionary and must balance the equities with care. Divorce was refused to a husband in his eighties, as his wife wished to avoid the stigma of divorce. — Dr. Nirmal Singh Panesar v. Paramjit Kaur Panesar, 2023 INSC 896.

Civil ProcedureArticle 142 cannot be used to override statutory provisions or supplant the substantive law that governs a case. — Union Bank of India v. Rajat Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., 2023 INSC 869.

Service LawDirections under Article 142 cannot contravene statutes, and sympathy alone does not justify relief beyond legal entitlement. — State of Orissa v. Orissa Khadi and Village Industries Board Karmachari Sangh, 2023 INSC 247.

Insolvency LawThe Authum resolution plan for Reliance Home Finance was allowed to bind debenture holders, except dissenting ones, who could either accept its terms or pursue their own remedies. — Authum Investment and Infrastructure Ltd. v. R.K. Mohatta Family Trust, AIR 2023 SC 1459; 2023 INSC 205.

Family LawKeeping parties tied to a marriage that has irretrievably broken down, after long separation and bitterness, is cruelty to both, and dissolution is the only solution. — Rajib Kumar Roy v. Sushmita Saha, Supreme Court, 2023.

Criminal LawWhere parties to a matrimonial dispute have genuinely settled, criminal proceedings between them may be quashed to secure the ends of justice. — Rangappa Javoor v. State of Karnataka, Supreme Court, 2023.

Civil ProcedureArticle 142 can be used to scale down the interest awarded. — Executive Engineer (R and B) v. Gokul Chandra Kanungo, AIR 2022 SC 4857.

Family LawWhile upholding the refusal of divorce on the ground of cruelty, the Court used Article 142 to dissolve the marriage as irretrievably broken down, and held that both parties need not consent. — N. Rajendran v. S. Valli, 2022 (3) SCALE 275.

Criminal LawThe Court may grant relief where manifest illegality or palpable injustice is shown, under Article 142 or its inherent powers as guardian of the Constitution. — Bhola Kumhar v. State of Chhattisgarh, Supreme Court, 2022.

Human RightsArticle 142 allows the Court to issue directions to fill a legislative or executive vacuum until the legislature or executive acts. — Budhadev Karmaskar v. State of West Bengal, Supreme Court, 2022.

Constitutional LawEven after declaring a statute unconstitutional, the Court may mould the relief under Article 142, here by saving acts already done under it. — State of Manipur v. Surjakumar Okram, Supreme Court, 2022.

Family LawWhether a single Judge may grant divorce on a settlement in exercise of Article 142 was referred to a larger Bench. — Anamika Varun Rathore v. Varun Pratap Singh Rathore, Supreme Court, 2022.

Source document ↗

Judgments on Article 142

NOV 20266FRI

LOK 2026 (11) SC 65 · Supreme Court of India

Union of India v. Rohith Nathan

Equivalent citations: 2026 INSC 1201

SubjectReservation, Service Law

JudgesJustice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, Justice R. Mahadevan

ActsThe Constitution of India, O.M. No. 36012/22/93-Estt (SCT) dated 08.09.1993 (OBC creamy layer)

The Rohith Nathan OBC creamy-layer judgment binds as precedent but its relief is confined to the parties; concluded selections are not reopened, while CSE-2025 allocation must follow it.

OCT 202629THU

LOK 2026 (10) SC 292 · Supreme Court of India

Shreeram Builders v. Upendra Kantilal Thanawala

Equivalent citations: 2026 INSC 1176

SubjectArbitration

JudgesJustice Sanjay Kumar, Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva

ActsThe Constitution of India, Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 — Sections 28(3), 34 and 37

A majority arbitral award granted a developer specific performance of an agreement concerning a 2/9th undivided share in land. The Section 34 court sustained the award, but the High Court set it aside under Section 37 for departure from the contractual terms. The developer appealed,…

OCT 202613TUE

LOK 2026 (10) SC 131 · Supreme Court of India

State of Maharashtra v. Sudhir Motiramji Hiwarkar

Equivalent citations: 2026 INSC 1118

SubjectService Law

JudgesJustice Dipankar Datta, Justice Sheel Nagu

ActsThe Constitution of India, Constitution of India — Article 14 & 142

High Court issued a mandamus directing inclusion of respondent-lecturer in list of surplus teachers for absorption, fastening direct financial/administrative liability on State — State of Maharashtra was not impleaded as respondent, though Joint Director of Higher Education was impleaded at a late stage — Held,…

MAY 20231MON

LOK 2023 (5) SC 12 · Supreme Court of India

Shilpa Sailesh v. Varun Sreenivasan

Equivalent citations: 2023 INSC 468 : AIR 2023 SC (Civ) 2212 : (2023) 14 SCC 231 : 2023 (5) SCR 165 : 2023 (6) Scale 402 : 2023 (3) KHC 435 : 2023 (3) KLT SN 19

SubjectConstitutional Law, Family Law

Subject–

Judges–

ActsThe Constitution of India, 136, 141, 142, 145(5) and 226, Constitution of India

All 142 judgments →