H. S. I. D. C vs. Raj Singh

ì

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).21114/2012

HSIDC NOW KNOWN AS HSIIDC Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

MANGE AND ORS Respondent(s) (With office report) with SLP(C) Nos.21115,21116,21118,21120,21123,21126 to 21128, 21131,21132,21134,21139,21140,21143,21146,21154,21156,21158, 21159,21163,21164,21165,21186,21189,21190,21191,21198,21199, 21201,21202 to 21204, 21517, 21519, 21521 to 21523,21525, 21532,21533,21535 to 21546, 21548 to 21560, 21570 to 21573, 21575,21580,21583,21002,21585,21587 to 21590, 21593,21597, 21601,21603,21605,21607,21609,21610,21613,21615,21617 to

21619, 21621, 21623, 21625-21628 and 21629 to 21631 of 2012 (with office report)

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

For Petitioner(s)

Mr. Ravindra Bana,Adv. Mr. Siddharth Mittal, Adv. Dr.(Mrs.) Vipin Gupta, Adv.

For Respondent(s)

Mr. Siddharth Mittal, Adv. Mr. S.K. Sabharwal, Adv. Mr. Govind Goel, Adv. Dr. Kailash Chand, Adv. Ms. T. Anamika, Adv. Mr. Govind Goel, Adv. Mr. Mohan Lal Sharma, Adv. Mr. Vivek Gupta, Adv. Mr. Anil Kumar Tandale, Adv. Mr. Himanshu Gupta, Adv.

Item No.80 -2-

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

In these batch of matters, the status of service on the respondents has been shown in the Tabular Chart.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has undertaken to take the necessary steps for reissuance of notice to the unserved respondents by filing the requisite process fee and spare copies within two weeks.

Notices be issued through dasti. Necessary steps, as per rules, be taken accordingly.

Further, the learned counsel for the petitioner has undertaken to file the necessary affidavit of service of the person, who has served the notice on the respondents, as pointed out in the second para on the second page of the Office Report. Necessary compliance be made by the next date.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has urged that considering the large number of the matters and huge volume of the Paper Books, he may be exempted from filing the spare copies on record and he has undertaken to supply the same to the concerned parties as and when they appear before the Court.

The office report further indicates that the learned Advocate-on-Record, Mr. M.L. Sharma has filed vakalatnama and Memo of Appearance on behalf of Vinod Kumar and Prem Kumar but

Item No.80 -3-

both are not party in the present matters. The learned counsel has undertaken to rectify the error by the next date. List again on 17.7.2013.

			(M.A. SAYEED)
		REGISTRAR

rd