In a stern reminder of judicial hierarchy, the Supreme Court on Wednesday chastised the Uttarakhand High Court for interfering in a matter already under the Supreme Court’s supervision — the ongoing probe into irregularities and alleged illegal construction inside the Corbett Tiger Reserve.
The country’s top court was visibly displeased that the High Court had entertained a plea and stayed a prosecution sanction against a forest officer while the apex court itself was actively monitoring the case.
Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai, joined by Justice K. Vinod Chandran, delivered a sharp observation:
“The High Court, no doubt, is a Constitutional Court and not inferior to this Court. However, when this Court is seized of a matter, it is expected of the High Courts to keep their hands away.”
The bench noted that its previous observations had prompted the Uttarakhand government to sanction prosecution against a senior officer, identified as Rahul, Chief Conservator of Forests. The sanction came on September 16, 2025, just days after the Supreme Court questioned the state’s delay in acting.
But the officer in question took the battle elsewhere — to the Uttarakhand High Court — challenging the sanction order. The High Court admitted the plea and, on October 14, stayed the operation of the sanction.
That move, the Supreme Court said, “virtually amounts to interference” in an ongoing proceeding before it. The bench remarked it was “deeply perturbed” by both the officer’s conduct and the High Court’s readiness to intervene, emphasizing that the officer had been following the Supreme Court proceedings through video conferencing and was fully aware of the matter’s status.
If the officer felt aggrieved, the Court said, he should have sought remedy directly from the apex court rather than initiating a parallel proceeding in the High Court.
Declaring the High Court’s intervention “inappropriate,” the Supreme Court ordered that the writ petition pending in the High Court be withdrawn and transferred to itself. The top court also stayed the High Court’s October 14 order and issued a notice to the officer, directing him to appear on November 11, 2025, to explain why contempt proceedings should not be initiated against him.
The proceedings form part of the long-running TN Godavarman case — a landmark environmental matter that continues to shape India’s forest and wildlife protection jurisprudence.
