Dallodi& Ors. vs. Union Of India And Ors. Northern Railway General Manager( Now The General Manager Norther Western Railway Jaipur Rajasthan)

ITEM NO.38 REGISTRAR COURT.1 SECTION XV

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).20156/2012

SANGMARMAR KHAN VIKAS SAMITI Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s) (With appln(s) for PERMISSION TO FILE LENGTHY LIST OF DATES) WITH SLP(C) NO. 21220 of 2012 SLP(C) NO. 23872 of 2012 (With prayer for interim relief and office report) SLP(C) NO. 24908 of 2012 (With prayer for interim relief and office report) SLP(C) NO. 24922 of 2012 (With prayer for interim relief and office report) SLP(C) NO. 24923 of 2012 (With prayer for interim relief and office report) SLP(C) NO. 24944 of 2012 (With prayer for interim relief and office report) SLP(C) NO. 31983 of 2012 (With office report) SLP(C) NO. 35934 of 2012 (With office report) SLP(C) NO. 36527 of 2012 (With office report) SLP(C) NO. 36923 of 2012 (With office report) Date: 05/08/2013 This Petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Ms. Naghma Imtiaz, Adv. Ms. Bushra Faridi, Adv. Mr. Naresh Kumar,Adv. Mr. S.K. Sinha, Adv. Mr. Naresh Kumar, Adv. Ms. Naghma Imtiaz, Adv. Ms. Bushra Faridi, Adv. Ms. K.V.Bharathi Upadhyaya, Adv. Item No.38 -2- For Respondent(s) Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal,Adv. Mr. Irshad Ahmad ,Adv Ms. Pragati Neekhra, Adv. Mr. Tulsi Prasad Rastogi, Adv. Mr. Ajay DS Mandyal, Adv.

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

SLP(C) No.20156/2012 The matter is complete in all respects. Further necessary orders to be passed as and when the other connected

:6

matters would become ready. SLP(C) NO. 21220 of 2012 The contesting respondent Nos.1 to 7 have already filed counter affidavit on record. Respondent Nos.9 and 10 are reported to be duly and properly served but none appeared on their behalf. Respondent Nos.8 and 11 are common in the other connected matter i.e., SLP(C) No.20156/2012 where they have been duly served. Therefore they are deemed to be served in the present matter also. SLP(C) NO. 24908 of 2012 The contesting respondent Nos.1 to 5 and 8 to 10 have filed counter affidavit on record. Respondent Nos.6, 7, 11 and 12 are reported to be duly and properly served but none appeared on their behalf. Item No.38 -3- Further necessary orders to be passed as and when the other connected matters would become ready. SLP(C) NO. 24944 of 2012 Counter affidavit on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 5 and 8 to 10 has already come on record. Respondent Nos.6 and 7 are granted four weeks' time for filing counter affidavit on record. Respondent No.12 is reported to be duly and properly served but none appeared on his behalf. Respondent No.11 is duly represented in the other connected SLP(C) No.23872/2012 and therefore, deemed to be served in the present matter also. SLP(C) NO. 23872 of 2012 Respondent Nos.1 to 8 have already filed counter affidavit on record. Respondent No.9 is reported to be duly and properly served but none appeared on his behalf. Respondent No.10 is common in the other connected matter, though in the office report, it is indicated that respondent No.10 is common but no details have been given. Registry to give a complete report by the next date and also to specify whether he should be considered as deemed to have been served? Item No.38 -4- SLP(C) No.24922/2012 The contesting respondent Nos.1 to 8 and 11 have filed counter affidavit. Respondent No.12 is reported to be duly and properly served but none appeared on his behalf. Further necessary orders to be passed as and when the other connected matters would become ready. SLP(C) No.24923/2012 The contesting respondent Nos.1 to 12 have already filed counter affidavit on record. Further necessary orders to be passed as and when the other connected matters would become ready. SLP(C) No.31983/2012 Counter affidavit on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 5 has already come on record. The learned Advocate, Ms. Pragati Neekhra, appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.6 to 8, 10 to 12 has filed counter affidavit for these respondents but vakalatnama on behalf of respondent Nos.6 and 7 only. The learned Advocate has undertaken to file vakaltnama on behalf of the other remaining respondents also. Notice be reissued to respondent No.9 through the concerned District Court in addition to postal service. Item No.38 -5-

SLP(C) No.35934/2012 Counter affidavit on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 5 has been filed by the learned Advocate Mr.S.N. Terdal and on behalf of respondent Nos.6 to 8, 10 and 11 by the learned Advocate, Ms.Pragati Neekhra but vakalatnama seems to have been filed on behalf of respondent Nos.6 and 7 only. An undertaking has been given to file vakalatnama for the remaining respondents also. Fresh notice be issued to respondent No.9 through the concerned District Court in addition to the postal service. Dasti is allowed. SLP(C) No.36527/2012 The matter is complete in all respects. Further necessary orders to be passed as and when the other connected matters would become ready. SLP(C) No.36923/2012 Counter affidavit on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 5 has been filed by the learned Advocate Mr.S.N. Terdal and on behalf of respondent Nos.6 to 8, 10 and 11 by the learned Advocate, Ms.Pragati Neekhra but vakalatnama seems to have been filed on behalf of respondent Nos.6 and 7 only. An undertaking has been given to file vakalatnama for the remaining respondents also. Item No.38 -6-

Fresh notice be issued to respondent No.9 through the concerned District Court in addition to the postal service. Dasti is allowed. List again on 17.9.2013.

rd