आदर्श न्यायाधीश: अरुण पल्लि का गतिशील करियर और उल्लेखनीय निर्णय

Born in a family of lawyers, Justice Arun Palli, who was already in the know-how of the intricacies of this field, entered the profession himself in the late 1980s. Since then, Justice Arun Palli’s journey has been a story of gaining expertise in diverse fields of law and an earnest commitment towards delivery of justice.

Early Life and Education

Justice Arun Palli was born on 18 September 1964, in a family of esteemed lawyers. His father, Prem Kishan Palli was a Senior Advocate, served on the Bench of the Himachal Pradesh High Court, retiring in 1998. His great-grandfather Late Lachchman Dass Palli and grandfather Late Lajpat Rai Palli, were renowned lawyers of the District Bar, Patiala.

Justice Palli graduated in Commerce and completed his Bachelor of Laws from Panjab University, Chandigarh, in 19881.

Career as an Advocate

Commencing his legal practice at Punjab and Haryana High Court, Justice Arun Palli mastered diverse areas of law such as civil, criminal, constitutional, revenue, industrial and labour law. His legal career took an upward trajectory when he was appointed as Additional Advocate General for Punjab on 1 September 2004. Justice Palli held this position until March 2007.Adding another feather on his cap, Justice Arun Palli was designated as a Senior Advocate on 26 April 2007

Furthermore, Justice Palli also served as Amicus Curiae (friend of the Court) in various contentious matters before the High Courts and dealt with diverse subjects and matters having important legal propositions before Division and Full Benches. Justice Palli also appeared before Supreme Court and Delhi High Court and argued several important matters in the High Court of Himachal Pradesh. 2

Judicial Career

In recognition of Justice Arun Palli’s expertise and experience, he was subsequently elevated to the Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court on 28 December 2013.

During his judgeship Justice Arun Palli also served as Executive Chairman of Haryana State Legal Service Authority since 31 May 2023 and was nominated as a Member of the Governing Body of the National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) on 31 October 2023, for a tenure of two years. 3

On 12 April 2025, Justice Palli was appointed as the Chief Justice of the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh and he took oath of the office on 16 April 2025.4

*Did You Know? Justice Arun Palli was the primary force behind timely completion of the modern District Court Complex at Kargil.5

Justice Arun Palli’s dedicated service was further rewarded when the Supreme Court Collegium recommended his elevation as Judge of Supreme Court of India, in its meeting held on 22 & 27 May 2026. 6

On 1 June 2026, Justice Arun Palli was appointed Judge of Supreme Court of India, and he took the oath of office on 2 June 2026.7

Notable Judgments by Justice Arun Palli

In Sandeep R. v. Manpreeth R., 2026 SCC OnLine SC 1733, which was a custody and visitation dispute concerning the minor daughter of the parties, while also taking serious exception to the manner in which the Family Court dealt with the mother’s application seeking restoration of custody, the Division Bench of K.V. Viswanathan and Arun Palli, JJ., was “astonished” that, despite the High Court having expressly taken note of the mother’s relocation to Pune while modifying the visitation arrangement, the Family Court acted “in the teeth of the express directions of the High Court” and proceeded on findings that disregarded that position. Accordingly, the Court declined to interfere with the High Court’s order and directed the father to comply with the High Court’s directions. The Court stated that the judicial officer was expected “to be more cautious in future”.

In Keshvendra Singh v. Shankar Singh, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 1588 concerning the interpretation of Section 12, Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 (Gangsters Act) and its effect on a pending sessions trial, a Division Bench of K.V. Viswanathan* and Arun Palli, JJ., held that Section 12 does not contemplate keeping other criminal proceedings in abeyance until conclusion of the proceedings under the Gangsters Act. The Court clarified that the provision is intended only to resolve a clash of dates, in which event proceedings under the Gangsters Act are to be given preference. Emphasising the mandate of Section 346, Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) for expeditious conclusion of trials and the victim’s right to speedy trial under Article 21, the Court held that Section 12 cannot be construed to permit indefinite deferment of other criminal proceedings. Finding that there was no clash of dates in the present case, as the sessions trial had substantially progressed while the Gangsters Act proceedings had not even commenced, the Court set aside the Allahabad High Court’s order directing the trial to be kept in abeyance. The appeal was accordingly allowed.

In Avon Elastomers (India) v. Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd., 2026 SCC OnLine SC 1669, raising a substantial question as to whether jurisdiction of the consumer fora would depend on the value of the goods or services paid as consideration or will depend on the amount of compensation claimed, the Division Bench of K.V. Viswanathan and Arun Palli, JJ., found it appropriate to first obtain the Union of India’s response to the formulated anomalies, including disputes involving fixed deposits, savings accounts, subsidised medical services, defects in fixtures and fittings, and defective components of high-value vehicles and therefore, directed the Union of India to file an appropriate affidavit within 6 weeks responding to the same. The Court directed to address the reduction of the National Commission’s pecuniary jurisdiction from ₹10 crore to ₹2 crore.

Invoking its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, the Division Bench of K.V. Viswanathan and Arun Palli, JJ., in Kuldeep Kaur v. Union of India, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 1540, extended extraordinary pensionary benefits under Category “C”, CCS (Extraordinary Pension) Rules, 1939 from the date of death to the widow of a General Reserve Engineering Force (GREF) employee who had made the “supreme sacrifice” while saving fellow workers and equipment and was posthumously awarded the Shaurya Chakra. Holding that the relief ought not to be confined to 3 years preceding the filing of the writ petition, the Court directed the Union of India to pay a consolidated sum of ₹10 lakhs for the period from 13 July 2000 to 12 July 2015.

In State (UT of J&K) v. Ravinder Kanta, 2026 SCC OnLine J&K 287, dealing with whether land in respect of which proprietary rights were conferred under Government Order No. S-432 of 1966 (GO) could be alienated without obtaining prior permission of the Government, and consequently, whether issuance of Fard Intikhab for such alienation could be denied on that ground, the Division Bench of Arun Palli, CJ.*, and Rajnesh Oswal, J., held that the Government cannot “pick and choose” judgments to accept or assail later as it undermines the principle of finality. The Court observed that the condition of obtaining prior permission for alienation, as stipulated in the GO, stood rendered otiose and could not be insisted upon, and therefore upheld the judgment of the writ court.

In Jammu Kashmir Sharnarthi Action Committee v. State (UT of J&K), 2025 SCC OnLine J&K 1304, a matter arising from a Public Interest Litigation (‘PIL’) seeking Scheduled Tribe status and Pahari Speaking People (‘PSP’) certificates for the Displaced Persons of 1947 (‘DPs of 1947’) who migrated from Pakistan-occupied Jammu & Kashmir (‘PoJK’), the Division Bench of Arun Palli, C.J., and Rajnesh Oswal, J., issued notice to the respondents so that a detailed response could be filed by the respondents and adjourned the matter to 10-02-2026.

In Court of its own motion v. State of J&K, 2025 SCC OnLine J&K 627, while considering a public interest litigation (‘PIL’), in respect of the illegal encroachments made by the shopkeepers in JDA Shopping Complex, near City Chowk, Jammu. The Division Bench of Arun Palli, CJ., and Rajnesh Oswal*, J., directed that the encroachments on public pathways, roads, streets, and nullahs by shopkeepers, street vendors, or any other commercial establishments should not be permitted under any circumstances.

Punjab And Haryana High Court | HSIIDC To Assign Reasons For Cancelling Auction Of Highest Bidder

In Arun Bansal v. State of Haryana, 2024 SCC OnLine P&H 663, a petition filed against Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited (‘HSIIDC’) by a highest bidder for an auction whose bid was rejected without assigning any reasons, Arun Palli* and Vikram Aggarwal, JJ. allowed the petitioner to be heard after which HSIIDC would pass appropriate orders.

In Nulife Prime Diagnostics LLP v. State of Haryana8, a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India in the nature of certiorari or mandamus seeking to cancel cancellation mail dated 6-11-2023 regarding auction of a plot in Gurugram wherein, the petitioner was declared as the highest bidder, or for directions to issue letter of intent for allotment of subject, to direct a stay, etc., Arun Palli and Vikram Aggarwal*, JJ. disposed of the petition requiring competent authority to assign reasons in support of such cancellation.

In A.G. Construction Co. v. Food Corporation of India, 2021 SCC OnLine P&H 306, the Division Bench comprising of Ravi Shanker Jha, CJ., and Arun Palli, J.*, heard the instant petition wherein the issue before the Bench was whether a partner can claim the expedience of erstwhile partnership firm in an individual capacity. The Bench stated, “The petitioner herein having applied independently without any partners, consortium or joint venture, cannot rely upon the technical qualifications of a third party (erstwhile firm) to claim eligibility.”

In Kanwar Kesri Singh v. Punjab National Bank, 2020 SCC OnLine P&H 2359, the Division Bench of Ravi Shanker Jha*, CJ. and Arun Palli, J., upheld the impugned order of Single Judge whereby, the Single Judge had held that the appellant is not entitled to pensionary benefits as he has resigned from service.

In Ambay Transport Co. v. FCI, 2019 SCC OnLine P&H 1267, a Division Bench of Krishna Murari, C.J and Arun Palli*, J. disposed of the writ petition after the consensus was drawn between the parties to present the case in front of the competent authorities. A writ in the nature of mandamus was sought for commanding the respondent to restraint from awarding the tender/contract whose bid had been accepted.

In Subhash Kapoor v. State of Punjab, 2018 SCC OnLine P&H 1517, a petition was filed before Krishna Murari*, CJ. and Arun Palli, J., praying that the State Government should be commanded to declare an area in question as a protected monument and to preserve it accordingly.

Defendant allowed to file written statement despite the defence being struck off

In Beant Singh v. Dilbagh Singh,2011 SCC OnLine P&H 15664: (2012) 3 RCR (Civil) 115, a Single Judge Bench comprising of Arun Palli*, J. allowed the defendant to file the written statement (WS) in a civil suit even after the expiry of 90 days statutory period.

In Man Mohan Sharma v. Manjit Singh9, , a Single-Judge Bench comprising of Arun Palli*, J. ruled on the interpretation and operation of Section 124 of the Trademarks Act, 1999. The judgment marks a discordant note with Stokely Van Camp Inc. v. Heinz India Private Ltd.10 and a Full Bench decision in Data Infosys Ltd. v. Infosys Technologies Ltd11.

*Judge who has penned the judgment

1. Hon’ble Shri Justice Arun Palli | District Court Srinagar | India

2. Ibid

3. Hon’ble Shri Justice Arun Palli | District Court Srinagar | India

4. Justice Arun Palli takes oath as 38th Chief Justice of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh HC

5. Bar Association Kargil Hosts High Tea in Honour of Justice Arun Palli, Registrar General M.K. Sharma. | The Administration of Union Territory of Ladakh | India

6. Collegium Recommends 5 Names for Elevation to the Supreme Court | SCC Times

7. Press Release Page | Press Information Bureau

8. Civil Writ Petition No. 3243 of 2024

9. FAO No. 4739 of 2016

10. 2012 (52) PTC 540

11. 2016 (65) PTC 209 (Del)

Powered by Nyaya 247 News