Seventeen judicial officers—including two Supreme Court judges, four judges of the Uttarakhand High Court, nine Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) members, and two district court judges—have recused themselves over the years from cases involving Uttarakhand-cadre Indian Forest Service (IFS) officer Sanjiv Chaturvedi.
The most recent instance occurred on September 21, when Rajveer Singh Verma, a judicial member of the CAT Delhi bench, stepped down from hearing Chaturvedi’s petition. The plea challenges a November 2021 Uttarakhand government order related to the Appraisal Report Channel of IFS officers. The bench directed the registry to place the matter before an appropriate alternative bench.
Verma's withdrawal adds to a long sequence of recusals in cases brought by the whistleblowing officer, spanning back over a decade. In September and October 2025, Justices Alok Verma and Ravindra Maithani of the Uttarakhand High Court recused themselves from a contempt plea filed by Chaturvedi. The officer had alleged wilful non-compliance with a High Court stay order by CAT members and its registry. Prior to that, in February 2024, Justice Manoj Tiwari of the same high court withdrew from a petition in which Chaturvedi sought documents from the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet (ACC) regarding his central deputation.
The history of judicial recusal in Chaturvedi's legal battles dates back to November 2013, when then-Supreme Court judge Justice Ranjan Gogoi recused himself from a petition seeking a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe into Chaturvedi's allegations of corruption and harassment. In August 2016, Justice U.U. Lalit, another Supreme Court judge at the time, similarly withdrew from hearing his case.
While judges have cited varying reasons and individual circumstances for stepping aside over the years, the cumulative total makes Chaturvedi’s litigation one of the rare instances in Indian administrative law marked by widespread judicial recusal across multiple forums.
However, the judges and officials did not state a specific reason on record for their recusals. Under Indian judicial practice, judges are not strictly required to disclose their reasons for stepping aside from a bench.
Most of the written recusal orders—including the latest one by CAT Delhi bench member Rajveer Singh Verma—simply state: "After hearing the matter for some time... [the judge] recuses himself/herself from hearing this matter." This is standard practice when a judge feels personal discomfort or potential conflict that they prefer not to detail in an open order.
In April 2025, Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Neha Kushwaha recused herself from a defamation case filed by Chaturvedi against a CAT member, explicitly citing "previous family relations" with another CAT member.
Chaturvedi’s litigation frequently involves high-profile bureaucratic and political corruption allegations—including petitions targeting senior government authorities, ministers, or administrative tribunal orders. When cases touch upon powerful officials or internal institutional oversight (such as Chaturvedi filing contempt pleas directly against CAT registry members), judges may step aside to avoid perceived bias or institutional friction.
Meanwhile, legal observers analysing the case have pointed out that in prolonged legal battles involving high-profile whistleblowers, judges often recuse themselves out of extreme caution to ensure the absolute appearance of impartiality—or to prevent accusations of bias from either party.
