We Expect The High Court To Act More Responsibly In Future: Supreme Court Criticizes Allahabad HC Fo

Supreme Court Criticizes Allahabad High Court for Overstepping Jurisdiction

 

A Supreme Court Bench comprising Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Manmohan strongly criticized the Allahabad High Court for interfering in a matter already under the apex court’s review. Setting aside the High Court’s interim order, which had restrained the supply of food items for lactating mothers and young children, the Supreme Court remarked that the order was "bordering on an attempt to overreach this Court." It emphasized that the High Court should have waited for further directions instead of acting independently.

 

 

---

 

Background of the Case

 

The issue stemmed from PIL No. 21609 of 2021, filed in the Allahabad High Court regarding the procurement and distribution of food under a government welfare scheme. On November 11, 2024, the High Court issued an interim order stating that any finalized tender should not be acted upon without its approval.

 

Challenging this, the State of Uttar Pradesh moved the Supreme Court (SLP(C) No. 30405/2024), arguing that the High Court’s restraint order lacked justification and was hampering an essential welfare scheme.

 

The Supreme Court took up the matter and, on December 19, 2024, stayed the High Court's order. However, the next day, December 20, 2024, the Allahabad High Court modified its own order, directing the State to proceed with supplies for the third and fourth quarters of 2024-25. This move drew sharp criticism from the Supreme Court.

 

 

---

 

Key Legal Issues

 

1. Did the High Court have the authority to block food supply without valid reasons?

 

 

2. Did the High Court overstep its jurisdiction by modifying its order despite the Supreme Court’s stay?

 

 

 

 

---

 

Supreme Court’s Observations

 

The High Court acted irresponsibly by passing orders despite knowing that the Supreme Court was already handling the matter.

 

"Restraining supply of food items to be used by lactating mothers and young children ought not be stalled without reason."

 

"We are surprised at what the High Court did after the Supreme Court's stay order. This course of action was neither warranted nor desirable."

 

 

The Court stressed that lower courts must respect Supreme Court orders and refrain from issuing contradictory directions.

 

 

---

 

Final Decision

 

The Supreme Court set aside the Allahabad High Court’s interim order and allowed the Uttar Pradesh government to continue implementing the welfare scheme.

 

It also annulled all other interim directions passed by the High Court in the PIL.

 

 

 

---

 

Conclusion

 

This case highlights the importance of judicial discipline and the hierarchical authority of courts. By overruling the Allahabad High Court’s intervention, the Supreme Court reinforced the principle that essential welfare schemes should not be disrupted without strong justification.

AdvoTalks : Justice Gets Easy - YouTube