A Bench of Justices BR Gavai, Vikram Nath and Sanjay Karol, however, appeared to question the correctness of its 2021 judgment where it had, in effect, issued a mandamus preventing Mishra from having extensions beyond November 2021.
Additional Solicitor General SV Raju at today’s hearing submitted that an initial appointment was different from extensions, and that the 2021 order had only heard arguments on the former.
Justice Gavai, who was part of the two-judge bench that passed the 2021 ruling, responded,
“Prima facie I hold that it was not rightly decided. Question of extension was not there, as you are arguing. Therefore, mandamus on extensions does not arise. It is my prima facie view that reconsideration is needed, subject to my brothers agreeing. In which way we do not know.“
Source: Barandbench
