Monthly Review: September 2025

Ploughing through a series of notable matters before the Dussehra break, the Court reserved judgement in two Constitution Bench cases—a Presidential Reference on the powers of the Governor and President, and the appointment of judges in the district judiciary. The Court continued hearings on the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of Electoral Rolls in Bihar and granted interim stay on key provisions of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025.  

Our monthly review tracks the Court activity and the Supreme Court Observer’s coverage in September 2025. 

A tussle between the executive and judiciary

On 11 September, a Constitution Bench led by Chief Justice B.R. Gavai reserved judgement in the Presidential Reference on powers of the Governor and President. The Court had begun hearing the case in July. President Droupadi Murmu had referred 14 questions to the Supreme Court invoking its advisory opinion under Article 143. Arguments were centred around the maintainability of the reference with state governments pointing out that several questions were settled previously in the Tamil Nadu Governor Judgement (2025).

In that case, the Court had restricted gubernatorial and presidential powers under Articles 200 and 201. It laid down timelines within which decisions were to be communicated to state assemblies, brought the Governor’s actions under judicial review, and deemed assent to 10 pending bills passed by the Tamil Nadu assembly under Article 142.

Our Arguments Matrix summarises key contentions in this matter while our Hearing Reports provide a more detailed account.

Direct recruitment under Article 233

On 25 September, a Constitution Bench concluded four days of arguments in the case concerning the direct recruitment of judicial officers as District Judges under the Bar quota. Arguments were centered around the scope of Article 233, which regulates District Judge appointments. Our Arguments Matrix highlights the arguments raised by the parties over the eligibility criteria, the appointment of District Judges as per the constitutional scheme and the correctness of Dheeraj Mor v Honble High Court Of Delhi (2020), which held that judicial officers cannot be appointed under the Bar quota.

Key provisions of the Waqf Act stayed

On 15 September, the Court granted an interim stay on key provisions of the Waqf Amendment Act, 2025, with CJI Gavai and Justice A.G. Masih reiterating that striking down of a statute is reserved for the rarest of cases.

The 128-page judgement held that deletion of “Waqf by user” properties was valid. It stayed the rule mandating five years of practice of Islam for establishing a waqf as there was no mechanism to determine that under the existing law. It clarified that creation of Waqf property is restricted to the owner alone and upheld the provision excluding protected monuments from Waqf property. Citing the separation of powers, the Bench stayed provisions which empowered a designated officer to determine whether a property was a waqf or a government property. It observed that such a decision can only be made by a judicial or quasi-judicial authority. Mandating registration of a Waqf, the Court also passed directions regarding inclusion of non-Muslims in the Central Waqf Council and State Waqf Boards.

Writing for the SCO’s weekly newsletter, Ajitesh Singh, researcher and fact-checker at SCO, notes that the Court’s stay order raises deeper questions on minority rights. Our Judgement matrix breaks down the key outcomes of the decision.

Hearings roll on in Bihar’s electoral revision

A Division Bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi heard three days of arguments in the Bihar SIR. In July, petitioners such as the Association for Democratic Reforms, Yogendra Yadav and the People’s Union of Civil Liberties had demanded an immediate stay on the exercise. They had argued that the revision shifted the burden of proof of citizenship on voters while excluding widely accepted indicators such as the Aadhaar and ration cards. They argued that this was likely to disenfranchise millions.

On 8 September, the Court directed the inclusion of the Aadhaar card and refused to modify that interim order in a subsequent hearing. The Court clarified that the Aadhaar can be used to establish one’s identity but reiterated that it cannot serve as proof of citizenship. Meanwhile, the ECI clarified that it would continue accepting voter statements and objections against the draft electoral roll even after the 1 September deadline.

Mystery mists over Vantara 

On 15 September, a Bench of Justices Pankaj Mithal and P.B. Varale granted a clean chit to Vantara, a wildlife conservation initiative by the Reliance Foundation. It relied on a report prepared by a Special Investigation Team (SIT) which stated that there were no irregularities in the animal rescue centre. The case had reached the Supreme Court based on two public interest litigations which made wide-ranging allegations such as unlawful acquisition of animals, money laundering, and mistreatment of animals in captivity. The SIT was set up by the Court which concluded its investigation and submitted a report within 18 days. The report stated that it had examined documents, conducted personal hearings, and sought expert opinions, concluding that all 35,308 animals were lawfully imported. 

Notably, the Court directed that the SIT report will be preserved in a “sealed cover”. However, a copy of it was provided to Vantara. V. Venkatesan, Senior Associate Editor of SCO, wrote about the judgement and the questions it raises.

Collegium Under Renewed Scrutiny

The appointment of Justice V.M. Pancholi reopened a debate around the Collegium system as reports stated that Justice B.V. Nagarathna, a member of the Collegium, had dissented against his recommendation. Justice Pancholi superseded scores of senior judges, including three women. Notably, he is also in line to be the Chief Justice of India in 2031. 

While dissents in the Collegium are not uncommon, the public nature of this one makes it unusual and significant. An analysis by Surendra Kumar and Rohan Naik for SCO draws from scholarship on the Collegium process and unwritten eligibility criteria that have evolved over the years, noting a shift in the Collegium’s functioning between 2017 to 2022 in the aftermath of the National Judicial Appointment Commission verdict (2015). 

Reflections to mark the Diamond Jubilee

At the end of August, the Bar Association of India, in collaboration with SCO, launched a commemorative volume of 32 essays at the Second International Rule of Law Conference. The volume, titled “The Indian Advocate: Supreme Court at 75 – The Journey So Far”, contains articles by judges, academics and practitioners. SCO published two excerpts of the book—the role of constitutional morality in legal interpretation by Gopal Subramanium; and the Court’s application of the Basic Structure Doctrine in the EWS judgement by Sudhir Krishnaswamy. 

Another significant collection of commemorative essays is “(In)Complete Justice? The Supreme Court at 75”, edited by Justice S. Muralidhar, Senior Advocate at the Supreme Court of India and former Chief Justice of the Orissa High Court. SCO published excerpts from this book on the Aadhaar case by Usha Ramanthan and the role of former judges as arbitrators by Amit George.  

Gauri Kashyap, Associate Editor at SCO, interviewed Justice Murlidhar about the book, the Supreme Court, the pendency problem and the decline of Constitution Benches. 

Notable Division Bench decisions

On 1 September, the Court in Anjuman Ishaat-e-Taleem Trust v The State of Maharashtra, held that teachers with more than five years of experience must clear the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) as mandated under the Right to Education Act, 2009. The petitioners had relied on Pramati Educational and Cultural Trust v Union of India (2014) to argue that the RTE Act does not apply to minority educational institutions. The Court questioned the correctness of that judgement and referred it to a larger bench.

The Court passed critical suggestions for criminal action against farmers for stubble burning and a resettlement scheme for cadets disabled during training. Gearing up for October, it also issued notice in Umar Khalid’s plea for bail as well as in pleas challenging anti-conversion laws passed by Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Haryana, and other states.

SCO.LRs this September

In September, we published five issues in Volume 9 of the Supreme Court Observer Law Reports (SCO.LR). Read them here: Issue 1, Issue 2, Issue 3, Issue 4 and Issue 5. 

You can access them on our landing page with concise summaries, mind maps and HTML versions of each judgement.