Mehar Singh vs. Gram Panchayat Sehjo Majra Tehsil Samrala And Ors Thr. Sarpanch

SECTION TVB

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. M V RAMESH

Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 8687/2012

REGISTRAR COURT. 2

DALIP RAM

Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.

Respondent(s)

WITH SLP(C) No. $22206-22209/2013$ (With Office Report)

$SLP(C)$ No. 6181/2014 (With Office Report)

$SLP(C)$ No. 15510/2015 (With appln.(s) for intervention and Interim Relief and Office Report)

Date: 19/02/2016 These petitions were called on for hearing today.

For Petitioner(s) Mrs. Amita Gupta, Adv. Mr. Sudarshan Singh Rawat, Adv. Ms. Reeta Dawan Puri, Adv. Mr. P. N. Puri, Adv. Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, Adv. M/s. Delhi Law Chambers, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Anant K. Vatsya, Adv. Mr. Narsingh Narain Rai, Adv. Mr. Yadav Narender Singh, Adv. Mr. Jagjit Singh Chhabra, Adv.

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

SLP(C) Nos. 8687/2012

Four weeks time is given to the learned counsel for the petitioner for filing the affidavit in proof of dasti service of notice already issued to the respondent No. 1.

SLP(C) No. 22206-22209/2013

Four weeks time is given to the learned counsel for the petitioner for filing the affidavit in proof of dasti service of notice already issued to the respondent No. 1.

Mr. Yadav Narender Singh, Ld. Counsel for the respondent No.2 has filed the vakalatnama and after that Mr. Kamal Mohan Gupta, Ld. Counsel has also filed the vakalatnama but till date NOC has not been filed. Four weeks time is granted to file the NOC.

SLP(C) No. 15510/2015

Service of notice is complete on the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 but no one has entered appearance on their behalf.

Fresh steps for the service of notice by usual mode to the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 shall be taken by the learned counsel for the petitioner within a period of four weeks.

List again on 11.4.2016.

SLP(C) No. 6181/2014

The Office Report indicates that despite order dated 30.9.2015 of this Court Ld. counsel for the petitioner has failed to file the proof of dasti. Viewed in that context, the matter shall be processed for listing before the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers for further future directions. Await orders. List thereafter.