Bajaj Hindustan Ltd. Through Its Deputy General Manager (P And L) A. K. Sharma vs. The State Of Uttar Pradesh Through Its Secretary

ÒITEM NO.151 REGISTRAR COURT.1 SECTION XI

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.K GUPTA

Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).21576- 21581/2008 (From the judgement and order dated 18/08/2008 in CMWP No. 3271/2008 & CMWP No. 5210/2008 & CMWP No. 7827/2008 & CMA No. 154065/2008 & CMA No. 154066/2008 & CMA No. 154069/2008 of The HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD) U.P.CO-OPERATIVE CANE UNION FEDERATION Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

Mr. Vikas Bansal, Adv. Mr. Ravi P. Mehrotra, Adv. -2-

BASTI SUGAR MILLS CO.LTD.& ORS. Respondent(s) (With prayer for interim relief and office report ) WITH SLP(C) NO. 21585-21587 of 2008 (With prayer for interim relief and office report) Date: 17/09/2009 These Petitions were called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Viplav Sharma, Adv. Mr. Anupama Sharma, Adv. Mr. Vishwajit Singh,Adv. Mr. Vishnu Sharma, Adv. Mr. Anupam Sharma, Adv. Mr. Shristi Singh, Adv.

Item No. 151

For Respondent(s) Mrs Manik Karanjawala,Adv. Mr. Viplav Sharma, Adv. Mr. Ravi Prakash Mehrotra ,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that information regarding preponment of date was sent to the appearing counsel for the respondents and produced the requisite letter, same be filed within a week. It is also submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that vide order dated 21st July, 2009 of Hon'ble Court parties were given one more opportunity to complete the pleadings in various cases within six weeks from the said date and that time is already over. Respondent nos. 1 and 4 have filed counter affidavit in SLP(C) Nos. 21585-21587 of 2008, rejoinder affidavit has also been filed. Respondent no. 2 has been served as per affidavit and proof of service in SLP(C) No. 21576-21581 of 2008 and SLP(C) Nos. 21585-21587 of 2008 is in different inks though served through some other person. Manik Karanjawala and Co. advocates though has filed vakalatnama only for respondent no. 1 in SLP(C) Nos. 21587 of 2008. Mr. Uday Kumar, Advocate is representing Manik Karanjawala & Co, today submitted that he is representing respondent nos. 6 to 9 in SLP(C) Nos. 21576-21577 of 2008, respondent no. 2 in SLP(C) No. 21586, respondent no. 1 in SLP(C) No. 21587 of 2008 and respondent no. 2 in SLP(C) No. 21587 of 2008. Respondent no. 2 Union of India in SLP(C) No. 21576-21581 of 2008 served but no appearance. In these circumstances service of respondents in these two matters is complete.

As per Hon'ble Court's order dated 21st July, 2009 six weeks time already over. List the matter before the Hon'ble Court.

(M.K. GUPTA) Registrar