Tamil Nadu Centre For Public Interest Litigation, Rep. By K. K. Ramesh Managing Trustee vs. The Union Of India, Rep. By Its Principal Secretary To Prime Minister Principal Secretary To Prime Minister

SECTION PIL $(W)$

ITEM NO. $30 + 32$

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

COURT NO.1

<u>Writ Petition(s) (Civil) 906/2016</u>

VIVEK NARAYAN SHARMA

Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

UNION OF INDIA

Respondent(s)

(With appln. (s) for interim relief and permission to appear and <pre>argue in person and office report)</pre>

WITH W.P.(C) No. 908/2016 (With appln.(s) for permission to appear and argue in person and Office Report)

W.P.(C) No. 913/2016 (With Office Report)

W.P.(C) No. 916/2016 (With appln.(s) for stay and Office Report)

W.P.D.No.37946 of 2016

Date: 15/11/2016 These petitions were called on for hearing today.

CORAM :

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD

	For Petitioner(s)
			(WP 916 of 2016)	Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv.
				Ms. Kamini Jaiswal, Adv.
				Mr. V. K. Biju,Adv.
				Mr. Gaurav Ghosh, Adv.
				Mr. Talha A. Rahman, Adv.
				Mr. Muhamed Nissam Pasha, Adv.
				Ms. Anusha, Adv.
			(WP 906 of 2016)	Mr. Vivek Narayan Sharma, Adv.
				(Petitioner-in-person)
Signature Not Verified
Digital Typic field by MAHAGIR SHEAR $908$ of $2016$ )<br>Date: 2014 11.16				Mr. Sangam Lal Pandey, Adv.
				(Petitioner-in-person)
			(WP 913 of 2016)	Mr. C.R. Jaya Sukia, Adv.
				Mr. Savravarora, Adv.
				Mr. Kamal Mohan Gupta, Adv.

(WP D.No.37946/2016)Ms. Sadhna Kumar,Adv. Mr. Shariq Ahmed,Adv. Mr. Amit Kishre Sinha,Adv. Mr. Sunil Kumar Verma,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Mukul Rohatgi,AG Mr. Tushar Mehta,ASG Mr. Atma Ram Nadkarni,ASG Mr. Saurabh Kirpal,Adv. Mr. R. Balasubramanian,Adv. Ms. Rekha Pandey,Adv. Mr. S.S. Rebello,Adv. Mr. Amog Prabhudesai,Adv. Mr. Ananya Mishra,Adv. Mr. Santosh Kumar,Adv. Ms. Aarti Sharma,Adv. Ms. Diksha Rai,Adv. Mr. Subas Chandra Acharya,Adv. Mr. Nikhil Rohatgi,Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar,Adv.

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

We have heard learned counsel for the petitioners at some length.

We have also heard Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, learned Attorney General, who offers to file an affidavit in reply to the writ petitions, answering not only the legal contentions urged in the writ petitions but also enumerating the steps that the Government have taken with a view to avoiding hardship and inconvenience to the common man.

Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner, submits that while some measures have been taken yet some more need to be taken. He proposes to hand over a list of certain additional measures that need to be taken by the Government to prevent any hardship, inconvenience or prejudice to the people.

Mr. Rohatgi submits that he will have no objection to any such suggestions being examined at the appropriate level and such measures, as are considered feasible without in any manner prejudicing the larger purpose underlying the scheme, being taken by the Government.

Post again on Friday, the 25th November, 2016.

Additional document/affidavit, if any, be also filed by the petitioner in the meantime.

(MAHABIR SINGH) (VEENA KHERA)

COURT MASTER COURT MASTER