Indian Muslim For Progress And Reforms Impar vs. Union Of India

ITEM NO.1715

COURT NO.7

SECTION PIL-W

$RESPONDENT(S)$

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

WRIT PETITION(S)(CIVIL) NO(S). 428/2023

INDIAN MUSLIM FOR PROGRESS AND REFORMS IMPAR PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Date: 08-11-2024 This petition was called on for hearing today.

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN [IN CHAMBER]

	For Petitioner(s) Mr. Rizwan Ahmad, AOR
	Mr. Amir Kaleem, Adv.
	Mr. Mohd Wasiq Khan, Adv.

• For Respondent(s) Mr. Abhimanyu Tewari, AOR Ms. Eliza Bar, Adv.
  • Mr. Shuvodeep Roy, AOR
  • Mr. Deepayan Dutta, Adv.
  • Mr. Saurabh Tripathi, Adv.

Mr. Anshul Narayan, Addl. Standing Counsel, Adv. Mr. Prem Prakash, AOR

Mr. Abhay Anil Anturkar, Adv.

• Mr. Dhruv Tank, Adv.
• Mr. Aniruddha Awalgaonkar, Adv.
• Ms. Surbhi Kapoor, AOR
• Mr. Sarthak Mehrotra, Adv.
• Mr. Bhagwant Deshpande, Adv.
• Ms. Subhi Pastor, Adv.
• Ms. Swati Ghildiyal, AOR
• Ms. Srujana Suman Mund, Adv.
• Ms. Neha Singh, Adv.
• Ms. Abhipsa Mohanty, Adv.
• Mr. Rishi Yadav, Adv.
• Ms. Sneha Menon, Adv.

Ms. Mandakini Singh, Adv.

Ms. Ashima Mandla, Adv. Mr. Mrityunjai Singh, AOR

Mr. Rajiv Shanker Dvivedi, Standing Counsel, Adv. Mr. Manoj Kumar, Adv. Ms. Tulika Mukherjee, AOR Mr. Beenu Sharma, Adv. Mr. Venkat Narayan, Adv. Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, AOR Mr. Sunny Choudhary, AOR Mr. Sarad Kumar Singhania Aor, Adv. Ms. Alpana Sharma, Adv. Dr. Ravindra Chingale, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv. Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR Mr. Avijit Mani Tripathi, AOR Mr. T.k. Nayak, Adv. Mr. Vikas Bansal, Adv. Mr. Siddhesh Shirish Kotwal, AOR Mr. Talha Abdul Rahman, D.A.G. Ms. Baani Khanna, AOR Mr. Robin Singh, Adv. Mr. Rohit Kumar, Adv. Mr. Govinda Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Anand Shankar, AOR Mr. Akshat Kumar, AOR Ms. Anubha Dhulia, Adv. Ms. Ruchira Goel, AOR Ms. Astha Sharma, AOR Ms. Ripul Swati Kumari, Adv. Mr. Shreekant Neelappa Terdal, AOR

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

Record of proceedings dated 26.07.2024 reveals that the petitioner has not taken steps to file fresh particulars in respect of respondent Nos.16, 19, 23, 26 and 34, despite last opportunity having been granted.

However, time is extended by two weeks to take fresh steps and file fresh particulars in respect of unserved respondents, failing which, this writ petition will stand automatically dismissed qua the unserved respondent Nos.16, 19, 23, 26 and 34, without any further reference to this Court.

List the matter after two weeks. Counter affidavit of respondent No.2 be filed then.

(JAGDISH KUMAR) (RAM SUBHAG SINGH) COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH)