Peetam vs. State Of U. P.

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR M.A. SAYEED Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).30969/2011 SAVITRI DEVI Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE OF U.P.& ORS. Respondent(s) (With prayer for interim relief and office report ) WITH SLP(C) NO.33984-33988/2011 SLP(C) NO.1082-1083/2012 SLP(C) NO.36334-36340/2011 SLP(C) NO.2603/2012 SLP(C) NO.2612/2012 SLP(C) NO.2820/2012 SLP(C) NO.3298/2012 SLP(C) NO.6345/2012 SLP(C) NO.3473/2012 SLP(C) NO.4249/2012 SLP(C) NO.8528/2012 SLP(C) NO.8439/2012 SLP(C) NO.7146/2012 SLP(C) NO.10597/2012 SLP(C) NO.16380/2012 SLP(C) NO.11879/2012 SLP(C) NO.10052/2012 SLP(C) NO.16336/2012 SLP(C) NO.11993/2012 SLP(C) NO.4687/2012 SLP(C) NO.8851/2012 SLP(C) NO.4242/2012 SLP(C) NO.3242/2012 SLP(C) NO.13641-13646/2012 SLP(C) NO.11303/2012 SLP(C) NO.11304/2012 SLP(C) NO.5566/2012 SLP(C) NO.8849/2012 SLP(C) NO.7815/2012 SLP(C) NO.7540/2012

Item No.16

SLP(C) NO.30590/2012 SLP(C) NO.16674/2012 SLP(C) NO.16695/2012 SLP(C) NO.16723/2012 SLP(C) NO.8631/2013 SLP(C) NO.8887/2013

-2-

SLP(C) NO.37493/2012 SLP(C) NO.37492/2012 SLP(C) NO.18104/2012 SLP(C) NO.7436/2012 SLP(C) NO.9748/2012 SLP(C) NO.33860/2012 SLP(C) NO.38289/2012 SLP(C) NO.27930/2012

l

Date: 03/05/2013 This Petition was called on for hearing today.

For Petitioner(s)

Mr. Abhishek,Adv. Mr Rajeev Kumar Gupta, Adv. Mr Balraj Dewan, Adv. Mr Kuldeep Yadav, Adv. Mr Yash Pal Dhingra, Adv. Mr Sumit Sinha, Adv. Mr Arun K Sinha, Adv. Ms Aparna Rohatgi Jain, Adv. Mr K.B.Rohtagi, Adv. Mr Syed Mehdi Imam, Adv. Mr Abdul Wadud Aman, Adv. Mr Subramonium Prasad, Adv. Mr Sanjay Kumar Tyagi, Adv. Mr Anshuman Upadhyay, Adv. Mr Manu Shanker Mishra, Adv. Mr Shikhil Suri, Adv. Mr Shiv Kumar Suri, Adv. Mr K.S.Rana, Adv. Mr M.P.S.Tomar, Adv. Ms Sandhya goswami, Adv. Mr Jitendra Mohan Sharma, Adv. Ms Reeta Chaudhary, Adv. Mr Sunil Kumar Jain, Adv. Mr M Khairati, Adv. Ms Tulika Prakash, Adv. Mr Kuldip Singh, Adv. Mr Samir Ali Khan, Adv. Mr Sunder Khatri, Adv. Mr Rajesh Goyal, Adv. Ms Sneha Goyal, Adv. Mr Ashok K Mahajan, Adv. Mr Imran Ahmad, Adv. Mr Subhash Chandra Jain, Adv. Mr Gopal Prasad, Adv. Mr Prashant Chaudhary, Adv. Mr Ayush Negi, Adv. Mr Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, Adv. Mr Braham Singh, Adv. Mr R.D.Upadhyay, Adv. Mr S.K.Verma, Adv. Mr Praveen Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr Tabrez Ahmed, Adv. Mr Himanshu Tyagi, Adv. Ms Asha G Nair, Adv. -3-

Item No.16

For Respondent(s)

Mr. Ravindra Kumar,Adv. Ms Anindita Pujari, Adv. M/s Lawyers Knit & Co. Mr Himanshu Tyagi, Adv. Ms Asha Gopalan Nair, Adv. Mr K.B.Rohtagi, Adv. Mr Vikas Mahajan, Adv. Mr Bhaskar Y Kulkarni, Adv. Mr Sandeep Singh, Adv. Mr Anuvrat Sharma, Adv. Mr Adarsh Upadhyay, Adv. Mr S.B.Tripathi, Adv. Mr Deepak Goel, ADv. Mr Rishi Malhotra, Adv. Mr A Ramesh, Adv.

Mr C.S.N.Mohan Rao, Adv. Ms Smita Bhargava, Adv. Mr Dheeraj Nair, Adv. Mr Arvind Kumar Tiwary, Adv. Mr Rajiv Ranjan Dwivedi, Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R SLP(C) NO.30969,33984-88,36334-40 of 2011 In these batch of matters, service is complete. Duly represented respondents are granted four weeks' time as final chance for filing counter affidavit. SLP(C) NO.1082-83/2012 Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 are reported to be duly served through post but none appeared nor any steps taken on their behalf. Respondent No.3 is granted four weeks' time as final chance for filing counter affidavit. An application for deleting respondent Nos. 4 to 8 from the array of respondents has been filed on record. Same be placed before the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers for necessary orders/directions. -4- Item No.16 SLP(C) NO.2603,2612 and 2820 of 2012 In these batch of matters, sole respondent is State of UP. Four weeks' time is granted for filing counter affidavit on record. SLP(C) NO.11993/2012 The ld. Counsel for the petitioner to file the process fee and spare copies within two weeks and on compliance notices be issued to the respondents through the concerned District Court in addition to postal service. SLP(C) NO.8851/2012 Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 are granted four weeks' time for filing counter affidavit. Notices be re issued to respondent Nos. 1,6 and 13 through the concerned District Court in addition to postal service. Remaining respondents are reported to be duly served but none appeared nor any steps taken on their behalf. SLP(C) NO.10052,11303,11304,16664,16695,16723,30590 of 2012 The ld. counsel, Mr Sandeep Singh appearing on behalf of Mr Anuvrat Sharma, Advocate-on-record has accepted notice on behalf of the respondents and undertaken to file vakalatnama and counter affidavit by next date. Four weeks' time is granted. SLP(C) NO.8528,8849 of 2012 It is pertinent to note that despite specific direction and reasonable opportunities, the ld. Counsel for the petitioner has failed to take any steps for getting the notices served to respondent Nos. 2 and 3 in SLP(C) No. -5- Item No.16 8528/2012. Matter be placed before the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers for necessary orders/directions. SLP(C) NO.3242/2012 On perusal of the record it appears that respondent Nos. 2 and 4 to 8 have been duly served through dasti but none appeared nor any steps taken on their behalf. According to the ld. Counsel, respondent No.3 has also been duly served but the office report is silent about it. Registry to submit proper report by next date. Office report further indicates that the ld. Counsel Mr Anuvrat Sharma had accepted notice on behalf of the State of UP and its authorities, but no compliance has been made till date. Concerned respondent is ordered to proceed ex parte. SLP(C) NO.3298/2012 Respondent Nos. 1 and 3 are reported to be duly served through post but none appeared nor any steps taken on their behalf. Notice be issued to respondent NO.2 through the concerned District Court in addition to postal service.

Respondent No.4 is granted four weeks' time for filing counter affidavit. SLP(C) NO.3473/2012 Respondent Nos. 1 and 6 are reported to be duly served through post but none appeared nor any steps taken on their behalf. Respondent no.3 is granted four weeks' time for filing counter affidavit. -6- Item No.16 The ld. Counsel for the petitioner has undertaken to file process fee and spare copies within a week and on compliance notices be issued to respondent Nos. 4,5,7 and 8 through the concerned District Court in addition to postal service. SLP(C) NO.7540/2012 Respondent Nos. 1,2 and 22 are granted four weeks' time for filing counter affidavit. The ld. counsel for the petitioner to file process fee and spare copies within a week and on compliance notices be issued to respondent Nos. 4,6 to 8,10,12 and 16 to 20 through the concerned District Court in addition to postal service. SLP(C) NO.4242/2012 Service is complete on all the 12 respondents. The ld. Counsel for the petitioner has made a submission at Bar that he would be moving the necessary application for deleting respondent Nos. 3 to 12 from the array of respondents being proforma respondents. Respondent nos. 1 and 2 despite being duly served have failed to appear nor any steps taken on their behalf. SLP(C) NO.10597/2012 Counter affidavit on behalf of respondent Nos. 5,9 and 11 has already come on record. The ld. Counsel for the petitioner to file the process fee and spare copies within a week and on compliance notice be issued to the unserved respondents through the concerned District Court in addition to postal service. -7- Item No.16 SLP(C) NO.4249,7146,9748,16380,11879 of 2012 The ld. Counsel, Mr Sandeep Singh appearing on behalf of Mr Anuvrat Sharma, Advocate-on-record on behalf of respondent-State of UP has accepted notice and undertaken to file vakalatnama and counter affidavit by next date. Four weeks' time is granted. Respondent Nos. 1 and 6 in SLP(C) No.4249, 9748 of 2012 are yet to be served. Notices be re issued through the concerned District Court in addition to postal service. SLP(C) NO.8439/2012 It is pertinent to note that despite accepting notice on behalf of respondent No.1 neither vakalatnama nor counter affidavit has been filed till date. Respondent NO.2 is granted four weeks' time for filing counter affidavit. Notice be re issued to respondent No.3 through the concerned District Court in addition to postal service. SLP(C) NO.7436/2012 It is pertinent to note that despite accepting notice on behalf of respondent No.1 neither vakalatnama nor counter affidavit has been filed till date. The ld. Counsel for the petitioner to file process fee and spare copies within a week and on compliance notice be issued to respondent No.2 through the concerned District Court in addition to postal service. Respondent No.3 is granted four weeks' time as final chance for filing counter affidavit. -8- Item No.16 SLP(C) NO.13641-42/2012 Respondent Nos. 1 and 2(common) are reported to be duly served through post but none appeared nor any steps taken on their behalf.

Respondent No.3 is granted four weeks' time for filing counter

affidavit. SLP(C) NO.4687/2012 Notices be re issued to respondent Nos. 1 and 2 through the concerned District Court in addition to postal service. Necessary steps be taken as per rules. SLP(C) NO.16336/2012 Notices be re issued to respondent Nos. 1 to 7 through the concerned District Court in addition to postal service. Necessary steps be taken as per rules. SLP(C) NO.18104/2012 It is pertinent to note that despite accepting notice on behalf of State of UP and its authorities neither vakalatnama nor counter affidavit has been filed till date. Notices be re issued to respondent Nos. 3 and 4 through the concerned District Court in addition to postal service. Necessary steps be taken as per rules. SLP(C) NO.9748/2012 Notice be issued to the unserved respondents through the concerned District Court in addition to postal service. SLP(C) NO.8631/2013 Respondent No.3 is granted four weeks' time as final chance for filing counter affidavit. -9- Item No.16 It appears that despite specific direction on the last date, the ld. Counsel for the petitioner has neither filed an application for deleting respondent Nos. 1,2 and 4 to 12 from the array of respondents nor took any necessary steps for getting the notices served. Place the matter before the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers for necessary orders/directions. SLP(C) NO.8887/2012 Office report indicates that the report on default is yet to be listed before the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers, as ordered on the last date.

SLP(C) NO.33860/2012 File and office report not received. List again on 17.7.2013.

hj