Data Needs Science, Not Guesswork:  Supreme Court Brings Former Chief Statistician into National Task Force

“Expertise of Former Chief Statistician Necessary for Comprehensive and Scientific Analysis of Survey Data”, On 06 February 2026, the Supreme Court of India, exercising its criminal appellate jurisdiction, passed an important administrative direction in Amit Kumar & Others v. Union of India & Others, appointing Dr. T.C.A. Anant, former Chief Statistician of India, as a Technical Consultant to the National Task Force.

A Bench comprising Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice R. Mahadevan held that the nature of work entrusted to the National Task Force requires specialised statistical expertise, particularly for the scientific analysis of survey data, and that such expertise could be best provided by Dr. Anant. The Court further directed the Ministry of Education to issue a formal appointment order, extend full administrative support, and ensure appropriate remuneration.

The interlocutory application was moved in a pending criminal appeal seeking expert assistance for the National Task Force, which was tasked with analysing large-scale survey data having national implications.

The applicant prayed for the appointment of Dr. T.C.A. Anant, citing his experience as Chief Statistician of India, and also sought directions to the Union Government to provide the necessary infrastructure, data access, and honorarium through the Ministry of Education.

The Court heard Ms. Aparna Bhat, Amicus Curiae, and Mr. K.M. Nataraj, Additional Solicitor General, before proceeding to pass directions.

“Scientific Analysis Demands Domain Expertise”

The Supreme Court found merit in the submission that the National Task Force’s work could not be effectively completed without high-level technical and statistical input. The Bench observed that the engagement of an expert of Dr. Anant’s standing would ensure that the analysis undertaken is methodologically sound, data-driven, and scientifically credible.

Accordingly, the Court directed:

“Dr. T.C.A. Anant, former Chief Statistician of India be appointed as Technical Consultant to the National Task Force for the purpose of comprehensive and scientific analysis of the survey data.”

The Court thus recognised that judicially monitored national exercises increasingly require interdisciplinary expertise, especially where policy-relevant data is involved.

“Union Government Must Facilitate, Not Obstruct”

Going beyond mere appointment, the Court issued binding directions to the Ministry of Education, Union of India, to ensure that the consultant’s role is not reduced to a formality.

The Bench ordered that:

“The Ministry of Education, Union of India shall pass an order of appointment of Dr. T.C.A. Anant at the earliest.”

Further, the Court emphasised the State’s obligation to provide functional support, directing that the Ministry must extend “all necessary administrative support, more particularly the infrastructure and data access”, along with “appropriate remuneration/honorarium in accordance with prevalent norms.”

These directions underline that expert appointments ordered by constitutional courts carry with them an enforceable duty of cooperation by the executive.

In view of the above directions, the Supreme Court disposed of the interlocutory application, making it clear that no further adjudication was required once the expert appointment and administrative facilitation were ensured.

This order reflects the Supreme Court’s pragmatic approach in recognising that complex national issues cannot be addressed without technical competence. By formally inducting a former Chief Statistician into the National Task Force and mandating full governmental support, the Court has reinforced the principle that evidence-based governance and judicial oversight must go hand in hand.

The ruling also signals that when courts constitute or supervise expert bodies, the Union Government is constitutionally bound to provide logistical, institutional, and financial backing, ensuring that such bodies function effectively rather than symbolically.

Date of Decision: 06 February 2026