In Re:Imp & Wkg Of Con Protection Act, 86 vs. Uoi & Others

Ö2 SLP(C)No. 6928 OF 1999 ITEM No.1 Court No.11 SECTION XI A/N MATTER S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No.6928/1999 (From the judgement and order dated 08/10/1998 in CMWP 968/97 of The HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD) STATE OF U.P. & ORS Petitioner (s) VERSUS JEET S. BISHT Respondent (s) ( With Appln(s). for exemption from filing O.T. & appln. for taking affidavit on record and for intervention and directions and for accepting supple. affidavit and with prayer for interim relief) (ALONGWITH THE RECORD OF SLP(C) NO.4135/2002 AND WP(C) NO.164/2002) WITH W.P.(C)No.164/2002 (With appln. for taking addl. document on record and directions and permission and intervention/impleadment) (FOR DIRECTIIONS) Date : 23/09/2003 These Petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BRIJESH KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR For Petitioner (s) Mr. Ashok K. Srivastava, Adv. Mr. Shrish Kr. Mishra,Adv. For Respondent/(s) Ms. Sandhya Goswami,Adv. Mr. B.V. Balram Das,Adv. Mr. Anish Suhrawardy,Adv. Mr. N.S. Bisht,Adv. Mr. Ranjan Mukherjee,Adv. Mr. Pallav Shishodia,Adv. Mr. Javed Mahmud Rao,Adv. Mr. Radha Shyam Jena,Adv. Mr. J.P. Dhanda,Adv. Mr. T. Mahipal,Adv. For State of A.P. Mr. T.V. Ratnam, Adv. Mr. K. Subba Rao, Adv. Ms. Sandhya Goswami, Adv. Mr. M.N. Krishnamani, Sr. Adv. Mr. S.K. Sharma, Adv.

-2-

For NCDRC Bar Asscn. Mr. M.N. Krishnamani, Sr. Adv. Mr. Prateek Jalan,Adv. Mr. Ranji Thomas, Adv. Ms. Bharti Upadhyay, Adv. Ms. C.K. Sucharita, Adv. For State of Arunachal Pradesh Mr. Anil Shrivastav, Adv. Ms. Jyoti Dutt, Adv. For State of Meghalaya Mr. Ranjan Mukherjee, Adv. For State of Jharkhand Mr. Rajesh Pathak, Adv. Mr. Ashok Mathur, Adv. For State of Uttaranchal Ms. Rachana Srivastava,Adv. Mr. Rohit Singh,Adv. For State of Maharashtra Mr. S.S. Shinde, Adv. for Mr. V.N. Raghupathy, Adv For State of Pondicherry Mr. V.G. Pragasam, Adv. Mr. Rajeev Sharma, Adv. Mr. Sanjay R. Hegde, Adv. For State of Rajasthan Mr. Ranji Thomas, Adv. Mrs. Bharti Upadhyaya, Adv. Mr. V.N. Raghupathy, Adv. For State of Goa Ms. A. Subhashini, Adv. For State of M.P. Mr. Sakesh Kumar, Adv. Mr. Satish K. Agnihotri, Adv. For State of Assam Ms. Krishna Sarma, Adv. Ms. Asha G. Nair, Adv. Mr. V.K. Sidatharan, Adv. for M/s Corporate Law Group, Adv. For State of W.B. Mr. Tara Chand Sharma, Adv. Ms. Neelam Sharma, Adv. For State of Kerala Mr. K.R. Sasiprabhu, Adv. Mr. John Mathew, Adv. Ms. K. Sangeeta, Adv. Mr. Sushil Tekriwal, Adv. For States of Gujarat Ms. Hemantika Wahi, Adv. Mrs. Anu Dubey, Adv. For State of Chattisgarh Mr. Prakash Shrivastava, Adv. For State of Bihar Ms. Sunita R. Singh,Adv. Mr. B.B. Singh, Adv.

For State of Sikkim Mr. Brijender Chahar,Adv. Mr. Ashok Mathur,Adv. For State of Tripura Mr. Gopal Singh, Adv. Mr. Anurag Sharma, Adv. ....3/- -3- For State of Haryana Mr. Satinder S. Gulati, Adv. Ms. Kamladeep Gulati, Adv. Mr. Ranbir Singh Yadav, Adv. Mr. Vinay Kr. Garg,Adv. For Govt. of Pondicherry Mr. V.G. Pragasam,Adv. For State of H.P. Mr. Naresh K. Sharma, Adv. For State of Nagaland Mr. U. Hazarika,Adv. Mr. Kamal Shankar,Adv. Ms. Sumita Hazarika,Adv. For State of T.N. Ms. Revathy Raghavan, Adv. For State of Manipur Mr. K.H. Nobin Singh, Adv. Mr. M. Gireesh Kumar,Adv. For State of Mizoram Ms. Hemantika Wahi,Adv. Ms. Monika Bapna,Adv. For UOI Mr. K.N. Rawal, SG Mr. Vipin Sanghi, Adv. Mr. B.V. Balram Das, Adv. For State of Punjab Mr. R.K. Rathore, AAG for Punjab Mr. R.S. Suri, Adv. Mr. S.S. Shinde,Adv. Mr. Mukseh K. Giri,Adv. For NCT of Delhi & Mr. R.K. Rathore, Adv. UT of Andaman and Mrs. Sunita Sharma, Adv. Dadra Nagar Haveli, Mr. D.S. Mahra, Adv.

and Daman & Diu Mr. K.C. Kaushik,Av.

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

A perusal of the order passed on the previous date indicates that the matter is partly heard b y a Bench presided over by Hon. Mr. Justice R.C. Lahoti and in one of the connected SLPs viz. in SLP(C) No.13683/2001, orders have also been reserved after hearing. List the matter after four weeks before a Bench presided over by Hon. Mr. Just ice R.C. Lahoti. ....4/-

I.A.No.8 in SLP(C) No.6928/1999:

This is a miscellaneous application which has been filed by U.P. Consumer Protection Bar Assoc iation. Let the response, if any, be filed by the respondents within three weeks as prayed. I.A.No.7 in WP(C) No.164/2002:

I.A.No.7 has been filed in the writ petition for amendment of the petition. Three weeks' time is allowed to file the reply to this application.

Both the above noted applications may be listed for orders before the same Bench (i.e. the Be nch presided over by Hon. Mr. Justice R.C. Lahoti) after four weeks.

Applications for impleadment are allowed. Learned counsel for the petitioner may furnish copie s of the relevant papers to the newly added parties.

(A.S. BISHT)(KANWAL SINGH) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER