State Of Punjab Irrigation And Power Punjab Through Secretary vs. The State Of Haryana Through Principal Secretary

\220ITEM NO.4 REGISTRAR COURT.1 SECTION IVB

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).9484/2008

STATE OF PUNJAB Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

STATE OF HARYANA & ORS. Respondent(s)

(With prayer for interim relief )

WITH SLP(C) NO. 9503 of 2008 (With prayer for interim relief) SLP(C) NO. 9507 of 2008 (With prayer for interim relief and office report) SLP(C) NO. 9511 of 2008 (With prayer for interim relief and office report) SLP(C) NO. 9522 of 2008 (With prayer for interim relief and office report) SLP(C) NO. 9526 of 2008 (With prayer for interim relief and office report)

Date: 01/05/2014 This Petition was called on for hearing today.

For Petitioner(s)

Mr Vinay K Shailendra, Adv. Mr. Jagjit Singh Chhabra,Adv.

For Respondent(s)

Ms Prity Kunwar, Adv. Mr. Ejaz Maqbool,Adv. Mr S.S.Rawat, Adv. Mr. D.S. Mahra ,Adv Mr S.S.Shamshery, Adv. Mr. Milind Kumar ,Adv

UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R

SLP(C) NO.9484, 9503, 9511 of 2008

As per the last order, application for amendment of the cause title were to be listed before the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers and according to the ld. counsel for the petitioner, Mr Jagjit Singh Chhabra amendment prayer has -2-

Item No.4

been allowed in SLP(C) nos. 9503 and 9511 of 2008 by the order of the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers on 21.2.2014 and amended cause title has been also filed on record. Registry to process the application for amendment of the cause title in SLP(C) no. 9484/2008 on priority basis. Proper report to that effect be filed by next date.

So far as the status/position of the remaining respondents in this batch of matters is concerned, same has been shown in a tabular chart perusal of which indicates that counter affidavit on behalf of some of the respondents has been duly filed on record while some of the respondents though duly served but none appeared nor any steps taken on their behalf (as shown in Col. 3 of the chart).

So far as State of Rajasthan in SLP(C) no. 9484 , 9503,9522 and 9526 of 2008 is concerned, a submission at Bar has been advanced by its counsel, Mr Amit Sharma that he would be seeking instructions as to whether counter affidavit is required to be filed or not. Two weeks time is granted, as prayed.

List again on 7.7.2014.

(M.A. SAYEED) REGISTRAR

hj