MANSUKH RAY SHARMA v. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN THROUGH CHIEF SECRETARY

1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7906 OF 2010 MAHESH CHAND BARETH & ANR. APPELLANT(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. RESPONDENT(s) W ith C ivil Appeal No. ___ __ of 2024 [@ SLP(C) No.34742/2013 ] Civil Appeal No s . 8656 - 8668/2011 Civil Appeal No. 9618/2011 Civil Appeal No.10709/2011 Civil Appeal No.10712/2011 Civil Appeal No.10711/2011 Civil Appeal No.10710/2011 Civil Appeal No.6898/2012 Civil Appeal No.1668/2012 Civil Appeal No.1038/2012 Civil Appeal No. 11332/2011 Civil Appeal No.11442/2011 Civil Appeal No.11407/2011 Civil Appeal No.4559/2012 Civil Appeal No s .6096 - 6104/2012 Civil Appeal No.8661/2012 Civil Appeal No. ____ __ of 2024 [ SLP(C) No.34663/2013 ] Civil Appeal No.322/2013 Civil Appeal No s .9328 - 9331/2010

2 Civil Appeal No.10281/2010 Civil Appeal No s . 2800 - 2802/2011 Civil Appeal No s . 2806 - 2808/2011 Civil Appeal No.2803/2011 Civil Appeal No s .2804 - 2805/2011 Civil Appeal No.2980/2011 Civil Appeal No.2978/2011 Civil Appeal No.2979/2011 Civil Appeal No.2976/2011 Civil Appeal No.2977/2011 Civil Appeal No.4569/2011 Civil Appeal No.3732/2011 Civil Appeal No.5180/2011 Civil Appeal No.5183/2011 Civil Appeal No.3731/2011 Civil Appeal No.5182/2011 Civil Appeal No.7646/2011 Civil Appeal No.1210/2012 Civil Appeal No.8302/2010 Civil Appeal No.2982/2011 Civil Appeal No.2981/2011 Civil Appeal No.2921/2011 Civil Appeal No.3730/2011 Civil Appeal No.4688/2011 Civil Appeal No.4745/2011 Civil Appeal No.5258/2011 Civil Appeal No.8215/2013 J U D G M E N T K.V. Viswanathan, J. 1. Leave granted in SLP (Civil) No. 34742 of 2013 and SLP (Civil) No. 34663 of 2013.

3 2. This batch of 47 appeals involves common questions of law. They arise from the judgments of the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jaipur Bench, Jaipur. The main appeal, namely, Civil Appeal 7906 of 2010 ( Mahesh Chand Bareth & Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. ) (hereinafter referred to as ‘ Mahesh Chand Bareth ’) arises out of a judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jaipur Bench, Jaipur in D.B. Civil Special Appeal No. 402 of 2009 dated 21.05.2010. The other matters arise out of the same batch as Mahesh Chand Bareth or out of the judgments relying on Mahesh Chand Bareth or based on the judgments which , in turn , relied on Mahesh Chand Bareth. By virtue of the said judgments, the appellants were denied relief. The appellants challenged the

4 selection of candidates to the post of “Prabodhak” (teacher) by virtue of advertisement issued on 31.05.2008. Recruitment and other service conditions for the post of Prabodhak are governed by the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Prabodhak Service Rules, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘ Rules’ ). 3. About 20060 vacancies were advertised and the vacancies came to be filled up soon thereafter. The grievance of the appellants is that their candidature should also be considered for the appointment on the post of ‘Prabodhak’, by adopting similar criteria in the grant of bonus marks for teaching experience as was done in the case of the applicants who had experience of working in Government educational projects. Their further grievance is that Rule 13(v) of the Rules insofar as it provides for age relaxation to those persons serving under educational projects

5 is a provision which is unconstitutional and invalid. Background facts: 4. A brief narration of the background facts is essential for appreciating the issues involved in this case. The Shiksha Karmi Project was a unique initiative launched in the State of Rajasthan in 1987 with assistance from the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA). The object was to seek to reach out to children in remote rural areas where the formal primary schools are either not in existence or dysfunctional. Local youth with some basic educational qualifications were identified, trained and provided continuous educational support to teach children in Shiksha Karmi Day Schools, Prehar Pathshalas (Schools of convenient timings) and Angan Pathshalas (Courtyard Schools).

6 5. The concept of Shiksha Karmi Project (as is clear to us from the document containing a study, placed on record by the appellants) indicates that the Shiksha Karmi Project rested on the assumption that barefoot teachers belonging to the local community, who enjoy local community support if intensively trained, can overcome lack of formal educational qualification. 6. They were selected through an established procedure laid out in the manuals and once the Gram Sabha voted on the creation of a Shiksha Karmi School, spot tests were held to identify Shiksha Karmis. The Shiksha Karmi Project had significant overlaps with the Lok Jumbish Project and the District Primary Education Programme (DPEP). 7. The Shiksha Karmi Project was fairly successful in reaching out to children from disadvantaged communities. A person serving in various

7 educational projects possessed rich experience of teaching and motivating people for education in rural areas. The workers were engaged in the name of Shiksha Karmis to address the problem of teacher absenteeism, poor enrolment, high drop out trends and inadequate access to education. The workers were to get only a fixed honorarium. The projects were introduced to accelerate universalization of elementary education. After the passage of the 83 rd Constitutional Amendment and the setting up of an elected Panchayat structure, the project worked in tandem with the elected representative members of the Panchayat. Formulation of Rules: 8. When matters stood thus, a Cabinet note was prepared which set out that to provide access to education to children living in far - flung areas/difficult terrain/small villages (Hamlet)

8 called Dhanis, a new regular cadre in the name of Prabodhak and Senior Prabodhak be created. As a first step, Section 89 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 was amended and in 89(2)(v) ‘Prabodhak’ and ‘Senior Prabodhak’ were added as one of the grades. Section 89 ( 2 )(v) , (5) & 6B reads as under: “ 89. Constitution of the Rajasthan Panchayat Samiti and Zila Parishad Service. (2) The Service may be divided into different categories, such category being divided into different grades, and shall consist of - (v) Prabodhak and Senior Prabodhak. (5) All appointed to posts in the service shall be made - (a) by direct recruitment; or (b) By promotion ; or (c) by transfer. 6B. Appointed on the posts specified in clause (v) of Sub - section (2) Shall be made by additional Chief Executive Office - cum - District Education officer (Elementary - Education) of the District concern ed in accordance with the rules made in this behalf by the State Government, from out of persons selected for the posts by the recruitment committee constituted by the Government in accordance with the rules made by the State

9 Government in this Behalf: 9. Thereafter, in accordance with Section 102 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 were framed the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Prabodhak Service Rules, 2008. Certain relevant clauses of the Rules are extracted hereunder: “2. Definitions. In these rules unless the context otherwise requires , - (c) "Direct recruitment" means recruitment made in accordance with Part IV of these rules; (k) "Teaching Experience" for the purpose of direct recruitment includes the experience gained in supervisory capacity in any recognized educational institution or project; 6. Methods of Recruitment. Recruitment to the service after the commencement of the rules shall be made by the following methods: - (a) by direct recruitment in accordance with Part IV of these rules, (b) by promotion in accordance with Part V of these rules. 13 Age. A candidate for direct recruitment to a post enumerated in the Schedule must have attained the age of 23 years and must not have attained the age of 35 years on the first day of January

10 following the last date fixed for receipt of applications: Provided (v) that the person serving under the educational project in the State viz Rajiv Gandhi Pathshala/Shiksha Karmi Board/Lok Jumbish Pariyojana/Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan/District Primary Education Programme shall be deemed to be within age limit, had they been within the age limit when they were initially engaged even though they may have crossed the age limit at the time of direct recruitment. 14. Academic and Professional Qualifications. A candidate for direct recruitment to the posts specified in the Schedule shall, in addition to such experience as is required shall possess – (i) the qualification and experience given in column 6 of the schedule, and (ii) working knowledge of Hindi written in Devnagri Scripts and knowledge of Rajasthan i culture. 25. Recommendation of the Committee : - The committee shall prepare a list of the candidates whom, they consider suitable for appointment to the posts concerned, arranged in the order of merit and forward the same to the Appointing Authority: Provided that the Committee may, to the extent of 50% of the advertised vacancies, keep names of suitable candidates on the reserve list. The names of such candidates may, on requisition, be recommended in the order of merit to the Appointing Authority within 6 months from the date on which the Committee forwards the original list to the Appointing Authority.

11 Schedule S. No. Name of Post Method of Recruitme nt with percentage Post from which promotion is to be made Qualification s and experience for Promotion Qualification and experience for direct Recruitment Remarks 2 Prabodhak (4500 - 7000) 100% by Direct Recruitme nt - - Senior Secondary School Certificate o r Intermediate or its equivalent, with Diploma or certificate in basic teachers training of a duration of not less than two years o f Diploma or certificate in elementary teachers training of a duration of not less than two years. O R Bachelor of Elementary Education (B. El. Ed.) O R Graduation with Bachelor of Education (B. Ed.) or its equivalent AND Must have at least 5 year s continuous teaching experience without any break in an y recognized educational institution/ educational project.

12 Guidelines of 27.05.2008 & advertisement of 31.05.2008 : 10. Before the advertisement was issued on 31.05.2008, appropriate guidelines were formulated on 27.05.2008 for the purpose of selection of Prabodhak. The guidelines dealt with various aspects including award of bonus marks. Among the matters dealt with apart from educational qualifications and emoluments were also matters pertaining to disqualification if the applicant had more than two children on or after 01.06.2002; disqualification with regard to persons having more than one spouse and of persons who had obtained dowry during their weddings. The guidelines also dealt with the requirements with regard to community certificate; reservation of 30% for women of which 5% was to be for widows; requirements

13 of age limit and relaxation. One of the clauses provided as under : “Selection Process: - Selection will be done entirely th r ough interview for which a total of 100 marks have been allotted. The classification of these numbers is as follows: - General Knowledge – maximum 40 marks Personality – maximum 35 marks Experience - maximum 25 marks A maximum of 10 marks will be given according to 2 marks per year for a maximum of 5 years of teaching/supervision experience. If the experience is for the employee receiving honorarium under the projects run by the state government, then he will be given 5 marks for each academic session, maximum 25 marks.” 11. Thereafter, on 31.05.2008, advertisement for district - wise recruitment for the post of Prabodhak was issued and selection came to be made. The appellants, who are teachers in recognized educational institutions filed writ petitions aggrieved by the award of excess bonus marks for the candidate with project experience. In some writ petitions, the age relaxation granted to the project employed applicants were

14 also challenged. Contentions of Appellants: 12. The appellants contend that Rule 13 (v) of the Rules providing age relaxation only to a few categories of teachers of certain government projects and denial of the same to other similarly situated teachers is discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Insofar as the award of bonus marks is concerned, learned counsels relying on Rule 2(k) which deals with teaching experience, point out that granting additional marks to para teachers having teaching experience from government projects is ultra vires the Rules. 13. Learned counsels also contend that the advertisement of 31.05.2008 did not sanction the grant of bonus marks and the administrative guidelines dated 27.05.2008 were not brought in public domain. It was argued that the rules of

15 the game have been changed after the match has begun. It was contended that if the intention of the legislature was to create the said post only for para teachers working in project, the same would not have been offered to private and other teachers at all. Learned counsel s further contend that the Rules do not provide for grant of any bonus marks. Learned counsel s for the appellants argued that the effect of awarding extra bonus marks for project experience has the effect of an indirect absorption of all the project appointees and this , according to learned counsel s, was contr a ry to the Rules. Learned counsel s for the appellants relied on the judgment in Bedanga Talukdar vs. Saifudaullah Khan & Ors. , (2011) 12 SCC 85 to argue that the selection process should be strictly in accordance with the stipulated selection procedure. Learned counsel s also

16 cited State of Maharashtra vs. Raj Kumar , (1982) 3 SCC 313. Contentions of the State: 14. The State contended that there was a historical background to the introduction of the Rules; that there was a laudable objective of achieving the universalization of elementary education and such educational projects initiatives had led to significant increase in literacy rate in Rajasthan from 38% to 66% between 1991 to 2011; that persons who had worked in the aforesaid educational projects were having valuable experience working in far flung areas and had direct interaction and connection with children. That the projects were started to mitigate the absenteeism of teachers in the rural areas especially in small villages. Added to this, there were dropouts from schools and to tackle all these several initiatives in the form of educational

17 projects were introduced. 15. According to the State, ‘Prabodhak’ was to facilitate and encourage children to attend schools. The State contended that as part of the selection process guidelines for the purpose of giving marks for experience can always be legally prescribed. All the Prabodhaks who were recruited possessed the minimum educational qualification and according to the State that was clear from the advertisement, which contained a specific clause with regard to the minimum qualification of Basic School Teaching Certificate (BSTC) for primary and Bachelor of Education (B.Ed) for imparting education for middle school students. 16. The State contended that t he experience gained in the projects has reasonable nexus with the concept of Prabodhak for which the newly framed Prabodhak Rules and Cadre were created. Insofar

18 as age relaxation was concerned, it was contended by the State that it was meant for persons who worked in the projects after joining within the age limit but have now become over age. According to the State, the idea was not to oust from consideration these persons who had worked in the education projects for significant number of years. Hence age relaxation was provided to them. According to the State, there was nothing discriminatory about it. In support of the submission, learned counsel s for the State relied on Satya Dev Bhagaur & Ors. Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors., (2022) 5 SCC 314. 17. The learned Single Judge and the Division Bench declined relief to the appellants. Aggrieved the appellants are before us. We have also heard the learned counsels for the parties proposing to implead or intervene.

19 Questions for consideration: 18. The two questions that arise for consideration are: i. Is Rule 13(v) of the Rules, insofar as it provides age relaxation to the persons serving under education al projects discriminatory and contrary to Article 14 of the Constitution of India? ii. Is the award of bonus marks to the project employed applicants discriminatory and ultra vires the Rules? Are the guidelines of 27.05.2008 sanctioning the award of bonus marks on a differential basis for applicants with project experience and other applicants invalid for any other reason? Question No. 1: 19. To answer this, a full look at Rule 13 is essential: “13. Age.

20 A candidate for direct recruitment to a post enumerated in the Schedule must have attained the age of 23 years and must not have attained the age of 35 years on the first day of January following the last date fixed for receipt of applications : Provided - (i) that the upper age limit mentioned above, shall be relaxed by 5 years in the case of male candidates belonging to the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and the Other Backward classes. (ii) that the upper age limit mentioned above shall be relaxed by 5 years in case of women candidates belonging to General Category. (iii) that the upper age limit mentioned above shall be relaxed by 10 years in the case of women candidates belonging to the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and the Other Backward classes. (iv) that the upper age limit mentioned above shall be 50 years in the case of Ex - service personnel and the reservists, namely the Defence Service Personnel who were transferred to the reserve. (v) that the person serving under the educational project in the State viz Rajiv Gandhi Pathshala/Shiksha Karmi Board/Lok Jumbish Pariyojana/Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan/District Primary Education Programme shall be deemed to be within age limit, had they been within the age limit when they were initially engaged even though they may have crossed the age limit at the time of direct recruitment. (vi) that the upper age limit mentioned above shall be relaxed by a period equal to the service rendered in the NCC in the case of Cadet instructors and if the resultant age does not exceed the prescribed maximum age limit by more than three years, they shall be deemed to be within the prescribed age limit. (vii) that the Released Emergency Commissioned Officers and Short Service Commissioned Officers after release from the Army shall be

21 deemed to be within the age limit even though they have crossed the age limit when they appear before the Committee had they been eligible as such at the time of their joining the Commission in the Army. (viii) that there shall be no upper age limit in the case of widows and divorced women.” 20. Fixing of minimum and maximum age requirement is a policy decision. In this case, the said decision is engrafted in Rule 13. A careful perusal of the Rule reveals that the minimum age required was 23 years and the maximum outer limit was 35 years. In the proviso there are several categories to which relaxation has been granted. Under clause (i) of the proviso, a relaxation of 5 years is granted to male candidates belonging to the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and the Other Backward classes. Under clause (ii) of the proviso, the upper age limit is relaxed by 5 years in case of wom e n candidates belonging to General Category and under clause (iii) it is relaxed by 10 years in the case of women candidates belonging

22 to the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and the Other Backward classes. Under Clause (iv), the age relaxation is of 50 years in the case of Ex - service Personnel and the reservists, namely the Defence Service Personnel who were transferred to the reserve. 21. Thereafter, we have clause (v) which states that the person serving under the educational project in the State , namely , Rajiv Gandhi Pathshala/Shiksha Karmi Board/Lok Jumbish Pariyojana/Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan/District Primary Education Programme shall be deemed to be within age limit, had they been within the age limit when they were initially engaged even though they may have crossed the age limit at the time of direct recruitment. Thereafter, we have clause (vi) which states that the upper age limit mentioned above shall be relaxed by a period equal to the service rendered in the NCC in the

23 case of Cadet instructors and if the resultant age does not exceed the prescribed maximum age limit by more than three years, they shall be deemed to be within the prescribed age limit. In clause (vii) the Released Emergency Commissioned Officers and Short Service Commissioned Officers after release from the Army shall be deemed to be within the age limit even though they have crossed the age limit when they appear before the Committee had they been eligible as such at the time of their joining the Commission in the Army. So finally in clause (viii) it is provided that there shall be no upper age limit in the case of widows and divorced women. 22. The challenge of the appellants is only to sub clause (v). We find that the provision s generally including sub clause (v) are not arbitrary or discriminatory. Insofar as the clause (v) is concerned, as has been mentioned hereinabove,

24 the historical background leading to the enactment of the Rules itself provides a justification for granting relaxation to the persons serving under the education al project, if they fulfil the condition that they were within the age limit when they were initially engaged. 23. As the counter affidavit of the State indicates that the projects were designed to deal with absentee teachers in the far flung areas which was causing a serious jeopardy to the education of the rural children. The para teachers , as they were called, worked under difficult circumstances. They had the advantage of interacting personally with the children of the far - flung areas. They only received an honorarium. The projects themselves played a large part in uplifting the elementary education programme in the State. The para teachers motivated the children to come to school. It was in this background that the grade of ‘Prabodhak’

25 and Senior ‘Prabodhak’ were encadred and separate rules enacted. 24. No doubt, under the Rules , opportunity to apply was also given to all those who possess the essential qualifications and who had teaching experience in any recognized educational institutions apart from the educational projects. This , however , does not mean that those who served in projects did not form a separate class. There was a valid classification based on intelligible differentia which distinguished applicants with project experience and those who lacked project experience. Further the differentia had a rational relation to the object sought to be achieved by the Rules . In fact, the job of a Prabodhak was exactly the job that the para teachers carried out in the projects and if the Government felt that the experience gained by them should not be lost and in that regard

26 granted them age relaxation, provided they fulfil the condition of being within the age limit at the time of their initial appointment in the project, no fault can be found with the same. 25. Dealing with the similar challenge in Union of India & Ors v. Shivbachan Rai, (2001) 9 SCC 356 , this Court held that the prescribing of any age limit for a given post, as also deciding the extent to which any relaxation can be given to the said age limit are essentially matters of policy. It was further held that it was open for the Government while framing the rules to prescribe such age limits or to prescribe the extent to which any relaxation can be given. Applying the said principle to this case , we find that the relaxation provided for in Rule 13(v) is not arbitrary or unreasonable.

27 Question No.2: 26. Insofar as the award of bonus marks is concerned, a careful perusal of the guidelines indicates that it was issued before the advertisement and all that it provided was out of the allotted maximum marks of 25 for the experience, ordinarily 2 marks w ere to be given for every year with a cap of 10 marks. However, if the experience is for the employee receiving honorarium under the projects run by the State Government , then he was to be given 5 marks for each academic session with the maximum of 25 marks. Even if part of the experience was in a project to that extent extra marks were provided to all the applicants. 27. In the application form, there was a specific column, namely , column fourteen which asked about details of the experience. The form also asked for the name of the employer and the

28 address of the institution employed. Thereafter, there was another column asking for the post in which they were employed and the period during which the emoluments were received. 28. Apart from this, the justification offered for defending the age relaxation is also available for the grant of excess bonus marks. In fact, as is clear from the background set out above, the creation of the post of ‘Prabodhak’ and ‘Senior Prabodhak’ was to get the advantage of the benefits that the projects gave to the State. At the same time, opportunity was given to all, with the only difference being that by an executive instruction additional marks were granted for project experience. The executive guidelines only supplemented the Rules and did not supplant them. 29. Moreover, intrinsically from Rule 13(v) the validity of which we have upheld, evidence is available to

29 show that the Rule recognized the experience gathered from project work stood on a higher pedestal because it was in tune with the nature of the work of Prabodhak. Further, under Rule 25, the Committee was to prepare a list of candidates whom they consider suitable for appointment. 30. In Srinivas K. Gouda v. Karnataka Institute of Medical Sciences and Others (2022) 1 SCC 49 , a notification was issued inviting applications for the post of Junior Lab Technician. Eligibility and requirements were prescribed. At the time of selection, the Selection Committee decided that out of the 15% marks for interview, 10% of the marks were to be set apart for the length of work experience and/or additional training in teaching hospitals of the medical college, with special preference to those who had worked in teaching hospitals of Government/autonomous medical colleges and the remaining 5% marks were to be

30 assigned to the personality of the candidates based on viva voice. In the minutes, it was set out as under: “ 4. …. It was decided that in order to select the most suitable candidates , proportionate weightage based on the length of experience and/or additional training to the extent of 10 marks be given to those candidates who had work experience and/or additional training in m edical college teaching hospitals and especially those who had worked in g overnment/ a utonomous medical college teaching hospitals . It was agreed that the type of work in these institutions most closely resembled the working conditions at Karnataka Institute of Medical Sciences, Hubli and hence the candidates who had experience in such institutions would be the most suitable. It was also decided to set apart a maximum of 5 marks for the personality of the candidate and his/her presentation and performance …. ” (Emphasis supplied) 31. The appellant in that case was selected and the selection had been set aside by the Division Bench of the High Court . The appellant secured 9.5 marks in the experience category while the writ petitioner who had challenged his appointment had secured one ( 1 ) mark under the component of experience. On appeal, the appellant contended

31 that the selection committee, an expert body, was entitled to apportion marks, and that the appellant had experience in Government/Autonomous medical institutions. The writ petitioner had contended that no explanation was furnished for dividing the marks and bifurcating the same. This Court while allowing the appeal in para 19 held as under: “ 19. It is in this background that we need to determine whether the marks allotted to the appellant in the category of experience and personality are arbitrary. The appellant at the time of submitting the application had a one year work experience in Ba p uji Medical College, Devanagere (a private institution) and three years of work experience with the first respondent. On the other hand, the respondent at the time of the application, had six months’ experience of working under a doctor who was undertaking private practice. Not only did the appellant have more years of work experience, he had work experience in a governmental institution. Hence, the marks awarded to the third respondent and the appellant bore a nexus to the yardstick determined by the Selection Committee. It is not the case of the third respondent that the appellant was given more marks for experience despite having less work experience. On a comparison of the marks allotted to both the candidates with reference to the yardstick

32 determined by the Selection Committee, no mala fides could be imputed to the Selection Committee. Nor is there an obvious or glaring error or perversity. The Court does not sit in appeal over the decision of the Selection Committee. ” 32. In the present case too, w e find no glaring error or perversity in the criterion adopted on the peculiar facts of the present case. No mala fide could also be attributed to the State and the Selection Committee . 33. Satya Dev Bhagaur (supra) was a case wherein the State of Rajasthan had issued a notification providing that such of the candidate who had worked under the Government, Chief Minister BPL Life Saving Fund, NRHM Medicare Relief Society, AIDS Control Society, National TB Control Program, Jhalawar Hospital and Medical College Society, Samekit Rog Nirgrani Pariyojna or State Institute of Health Family Welfare would be entitled to bonus marks as per the experience attained. It was provided that for one year of

33 experience, the bonus marks will be 10, for two years of experience the bonus marks will be 20 and for three years of experience it will be 30. This notification was challenged by certain persons who had experience of working in NRHM Scheme on contract basis in States other than Rajasthan. They sought a direction to accept their experience certificate so as to entitle them to obtain the bonus marks. While the Single Judge allowed the Writ Petitions, the Division Bench reversed the same and the aggrieved Writ Petitioners were in Appeal. Examining the question whether bonus marks would be available to employees of NRHM Scheme in other States, this Court while repelling the contention held that in matters of policy, Courts should be slow in interfering , unless the policy is found to be palpably discriminatory and arbitrary. It was further held that the court would not interfere with the policy decision when the

34 State was in a position to point out that there was an intelligible differentia in the application of the policy and that such intelligible differentia had a nexus with the object sought to be achieved. On the facts of that case, the Court held as follows: “20. It could thus clearly be seen that the Division Bench in Jagdish Prasad [Jagdish Prasad v. State of Rajasthan, 2016 SCC OnLine Raj 646] after considering the record, has come to the finding that the Government of Rajasthan has conducted several training programmes for the persons working with it on contractual basis, as well as under different schemes. The training programmes mainly pertain to the peculiar working pattern in the rural areas of the State of Rajasthan including tribal and arid zones. The Division Bench has further come to a finding that participation in such a training is mandatory and non - joining of the same would result in non - renewal of service contracts. It has been held that persons having special knowledge in working in the State of Rajasthan form a class different than the persons not having such experience of working in the State. It was found that the benefit extended by the State policy was only that of giving a little more weightage on the basis of experience and all the candidates were required to undergo the rigor of selection process. The Division Bench has clearly held that the experienced candidates in other States cannot be compared with the candidates working in the State of Rajasthan, as every State has its own problems and issues and the persons trained to meet such circumstances,

35 stand on a different pedestal.” 34. We find that the ratio laid down in the said judgment is applicable to the facts of the present case also to uphold the action of the State. 35. The judgment of this Court in Raj Kumar (supra) cited by the learned counsel for the appellants is clearly distinguishable. That case dealt with the Rule which provided that any person who has passed the SSC examination and is supposed to be a rural candidate was to be given weightage by the Public Service Commission by awarding 10% marks in each subject for such a candidate. It was also provided that the Viva Voce Board was to put relevant questions to judge the suitability of the candidate for working in rural areas and to test whether or not they had sufficient knowledge of rural problems. Rural candidate was defined to mean a candidate who comes from the rural area and who has passed SSC examination which is

36 held from a village or a town having only a ‘C’ type Municipality. The purported object of the Rule was to take officers who had full knowledge of rural life, its problems, aptitudes and working of the people in villages. This Court held that the Rule did not fulfil or carry out the object sought to be achieved since as the Rules stood any person who may not have lived in a village at all can appear for SSC Examination from a village and yet become eligible for selection. The Court found that there was no nexus between the classification and the object sought to be achieved. The Court also faulted the weightage marks given by holding that since in the viva voce questions to judge the suitability of the candidate for working in rural areas were anyway being put, there was absolutely no occasion for giving weightage which would convert demerit into merit and merit into demerit. On the facts of that case,

37 the Court found the rule of weightage to be manifestly unreasonable and wholly arbitrary. The said case has no application to the facts of the present case. 36. Equally the judgment in Kailash Chand Sharma vs State of Rajasthan & Ors., (2002) 6 SCC 562 has also no application. This Court in that case held that the award of bonus marks to the residents of the district and residents of the rural areas of the district amounts to impermissible discrimination. The Court found that there was no rational basis for such preferential treatment on the material placed before the Court. The Court found that the ostensible reasons advanced by the State were non - existent or irrelevant, having no nexus with the object sought to be achieved. It also found that no criteria was set out for determining as to residents in rural areas. The Court in Kailash

38 Chand Sharma (supra) followed the judgment in Raj Kumar (Supra) . 37. The judgment in Official Liquidator vs. Dayanand & Ors. (2008) 10 SCC 1 cited by the appellants has no connection at all with the issues raised in the present case. Yet another case cited by the appellant s is Bedanga Talukdar (supra). The appellants relied on the said judgment to contend that there could be no relaxation in the terms and conditions contained in the advertisement and even if there was power of relaxation the same will have to be specifically indicated in the advertisement. The case is wholly inapplicable. In this case, before the advertisement was issued, the guidelines setting out various aspects including the aspect of bonus marks were issued and , as discussed earlier , no infirmity can be found with the same.

39 38. Similarly, the judgment in State of Rajasthan vs. Archana (2017) 11 SCC 421 and the judgment in Civil Appeal 12335 of 2016 dated 18.01.2022 in Manoj Kumar Acharya vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. , cited by the State have no application to the facts of the present case. 39. The argument that the guideline was not in public domain was not an argument canvassed either before the learned Single Judge or before the Division Bench. In any event, the contention does not impress us on the facts of the present case. The guideline setting out the selection process was issued before the advertisement and it was applied uniformly and across the board to all the applicants. No prejudice has been caused to the applicants even assuming that the guideline was not in the public domain. It was a procedure adopted by the recruiting Authority and endorsed

40 by the Selection Committee. The appellants have had the opportunity to assail the validity of the prescription of the award of bonus marks and as such have had a fora to ventilate their grievance. They have failed in the process. Hence, we cannot jettison the guideline on the alleged ground that it was not in public domain. Equally, since the guidelines of 27.05.2008 preceded the advertisement of 31.05.2008, there is no merit in the argument feebly advanced that the rules of the game had been changed after the match had begun. 40. On the special facts of this case, considering the peculiarity that obtained in the State of Rajasthan with regard to absentee teachers and drop out of students and the introduction of the projects with para legal s to address the situation, we find no illegality in the prescription of additional marks for those applicants who

41 had experience of working in projects, while recruiting Prabhodhaks. The statutory rules in Rule 13(v) recognize that project employed applicants were a class apart with the idea being that their experience should not be wasted. In view of the above, we find no illegality in the award of bonus marks. 41. In view of the above, we find no merit in the appeals and all the appeals are dismissed with no order as to costs. All applications for impleadment and intervention are closed. ………...................... . .J. [ SURYA KANT ] ……….........................J. [ K. V. VISWANATHAN ] New Delhi; July 08 , 2024.

1 ITEM NO.1501 COURT NO.3 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal No(s). 7906/2010 MAHESH CHAND BARETH & ANR. Appellant(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (IA No. 14736/2023 - EARLY HEARING APPLICATION, IA No. 119366/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T., IA No. 82640/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T., IA No. 10227/2018 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION, IA No. 129636/2023 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION, IA No. 129600/2023 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION, IA No. 64052/2022 – INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT, IA No. 119365/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES AND IA No. 82639/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) WITH SLP(C) No. 34742/2013 (XV) C.A. No. 8656-8668/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 9618/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 10709/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 10712/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 10711/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 10710/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 6898/2012 (XV) C.A. No. 1668/2012 (XV) C.A. No. 1038/2012 (XV) (FOR APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS ON IA 39221/2022 FOR DISCHARGE OF ADVOCATE ON RECORD ON IA 83018/2022, IA No. 39221/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No. 105545/2022 - DISCHARGE OF ADVOCATE ON RECORD, IA No. 83018/2022 - DISCHARGE OF ADVOCATE ON RECORD) C.A. No. 11332/2011 (XV) (IA No. 104886/2017 – INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT AND IA No. 87186/2017 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT)

2 C.A. No. 11442/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 11407/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 4559/2012 (XV) C.A. No. 6096-6104/2012 (XV) C.A. No. 8661/2012 (XV) (FOR APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS ON IA 39217/2022 IA No. 39217/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS) SLP(C) No. 34663/2013 (XV) C.A. No. 322/2013 (XV) C.A. No. 9328-9331/2010 (XV) C.A. No. 10281/2010 (XV) C.A. No. 2800-2802/2011 (XV) (FOR APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS ON IA 39270/2022 IA No. 39270/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS) C.A. No. 2806-2808/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2803/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2804-2805/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2980/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2978/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2979/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2976/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2977/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 4569/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 3732/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 5180/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 5183/2011 (XV) IA No. 157787/2023 - APPLICATION FOR TRANSPOSITION) C.A. No. 3731/2011 (XV)

3 C.A. No. 5182/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 7646/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 1210/2012 (XV) C.A. No. 8302/2010 (XV) C.A. No. 2982/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2981/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2921/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 3730/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 4688/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 4745/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 5258/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 8215/2013 (XV) Date : 08-07-2024 These matters were called on for pronouncement of judgment today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Rakesh Dahiya, AOR Mr. Aakash Dahiya, Adv. Mr. Aditya Dahiya, Adv. Mr. Rishabh Sharma, Adv. Mr. Praveen Swarup, Adv. Mr. Devesh Maurya, Adv. Ms. Pareena Swarup, Adv. Mr. Ameet Siingh, Adv. Ms. Payal Swarup, Adv. Mr. Ravi Kumar, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tomar, Adv. Mr. Praveen Swarup, AOR Mr. Chandra Pratap Singh, Adv. Mrs. Trishna Virmani, Adv. Mr. Sarad Kumar Singhania, AOR Mr. P. K. Jain, AOR Mr. Ajay Choudhary, AOR Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, AOR Ms. Pratibha Jain, AOR

4 Mr. Puneet Jain, Adv. Mr. Sushil Kumar Jain, Sr. Adv. Mrs. Christi Jain, Adv. Mr. Mann Arora, Adv. Mrs. Akriti Sharma, Adv. Ms. Akriti Sharma, Adv. Mr. Harsh Jain, Adv. Mr. Harshjain, Adv. Mr. Bankey Bihari Sharma, AOR Mr. Mukul Kumar, AOR Mr. Rishi Matoliya, AOR Ms. Archana Pathak Dave, Sr. Adv. Ms. Chitrangda Rastravara, Adv. Mr. Anirudh Singh, Adv. Mr. Abhijeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Aishwary Mishra, Adv. Mr. Dhananjai Shekhwat, Adv. Mr. Dashrath Singh, Adv. Ms. Anjali Saxena, Adv. Mr. Gp. Capt. Karan Singh Bhati, AOR Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Adv. Ms. Deeksha Saggi, Adv. Mr. Rituparn Uniyal, Adv. Mr. Nayan Mishra, Adv. Mr. K Anil Singh, Adv. Mr. Ram Lal Roy, AOR Ms. Parul Shukla, AOR For Respondent(s) Ms. Pragati Neekhra, AOR Dr. Sushil Balwada, AOR Mr. Kaushal Yadav, Adv. Mr. Nandlal Kumar Mishra, Adv. Dr. Nirmal Chopra, AOR Mr. Nikilesh Ramachandran, AOR Ms. Ruchi Kohli, AOR Mr. Sandeep Kumar Jha, AOR Mr. Ranbir Singh Yadav, AOR Mr. Prateek Yadav, Adv. Mr. Puran Mal Saini, Adv. Ms. Anzu K. Varkey, Adv. Mr. Pati Raj Yadav, Adv.

5 Ms. Shivika Nehra, Adv. Mr. Mukul Kumar, AOR Mr. Shiv Mangal Sharma, Adv. Ms. Nidhi Jaswal, Adv. Mr. Amesh Bansal, Adv. Mr. Milind Kumar, AOR Mr. Harsha Vinoy, Adv. Mr. Satpal Singh, AOR Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Adv. Ms. Deeksha Saggi, Adv. Mr. Rituparn Uniyal, Adv. Mr. Nayan Mishra, Adv. Mr. K Anil Singh, Adv. Mr. Ram Lal Roy, AOR 1. Hon’ble Mr. Justice K.V. Viswanathan pronounced the judgment of the Bench comprising Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surya Kant and His Lordship. 2. Leave granted in SLP(C) No. 34742 of 2013 and SLP(C) No. 34663 of 2013 . 3. The appeals are dismissed in terms of the signed reportable judgment. 4. P ending applications, if any, stand disposed of. (DEEPAK SINGH) (ANJU KAPOOR) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH) [Signed reportable judgment is placed on the file]

ITEM NO.101 COURT NO.4 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal No(s).7906/2010 MAHESH CHAND BARETH & ANR. Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) ([GROUP MATTER] [FOR FURTHER HEARING] IA No. 14736/2023 - EARLY HEARING APPLICATION, IA No.82640/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T., IA No. 119366/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T., IA No. 10227/2018 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION, IA No.129636/2023 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION, IA No.129600/2023 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION, IA No. 64052/2022 – INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT, IA No. 82639/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES, IA No.119365/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) WITH SLP(C) No.34742/2013 (XV) C.A. No.8656-8668/2011 (XV) C.A. No.9618/2011 (XV) C.A. No.10709/2011 (XV) C.A. No.10712/2011 (XV) C.A. No.10711/2011 (XV) C.A. No.10710/2011 (XV) C.A. No.6898/2012 (XV) C.A. No.1668/2012 (XV) C.A. No.1038/2012 (XV) (IA No. 39221/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No.105545/2022 - DISCHARGE OF ADVOCATE ON RECORD, IA No.83018/2022 - DISCHARGE OF ADVOCATE ON RECORD) C.A. No.11332/2011 (XV) (IA No.3/2013 - FOR INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No.104886/2017 – INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT, IA No.87186/2017 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT) C.A. No.11442/2011 (XV) 1

C.A. No.11407/2011 (XV) C.A. No.4559/2012 (XV) C.A. No.6096-6104/2012 (XV) C.A. No.8661/2012 (XV) (IA No. 39217/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS) SLP(C) No.34663/2013 (XV) C.A. No.322/2013 (XV) C.A. No.9328-9331/2010 (XV) C.A. No.10281/2010 (XV) C.A. No.2800-2802/2011 (XV) (IA No. 39270/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS) C.A. No.2806-2808/2011 (XV) C.A. No.2803/2011 (XV) C.A. No.2804-2805/2011 (XV) C.A. No.2980/2011 (XV) C.A. No.2978/2011 (XV) C.A. No.2979/2011 (XV) C.A. No.2976/2011 (XV) C.A. No.2977/2011 (XV) C.A. No.4569/2011 (XV) C.A. No.3732/2011 (XV) C.A. No.5180/2011 (XV) C.A. No.5183/2011 (XV) (IA No.157787/2023 - APPLICATION FOR TRANSPOSITION) C.A. No.3731/2011 (XV) C.A. No.5182/2011 (XV) C.A. No.7646/2011 (XV) C.A. No.1210/2012 (XV) 2

C.A. No.8302/2010 (XV) C.A. No.2982/2011 (XV) C.A. No.2981/2011 (XV) C.A. No.2921/2011 (XV) C.A. No.3730/2011 (XV) C.A. No.4688/2011 (XV) C.A. No.4745/2011 (XV) C.A. No.5258/2011 (XV) C.A. No.8215/2013 (XV) Date : 29-02-2024 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.V. VISWANATHAN For Appellant(s) Mr. Sushil Kumar Jain, Sr. Adv. Mr. Puneet Jain, Adv. Mrs. Christi Jain, Adv. Ms. Akriti Sharma, Adv. Mr. Mann Arora, Adv. Ms. Lisha Bhati, Adv. Ms. Pratibha Jain, AOR Ms. Archana Pathak Dave, Sr. Adv. Ms. Chitrangda Rastravara, Adv. Mr. Aishwary Mishra, Adv. Mr. Dhananjai Shekhwat, Adv. Mr. Dashrath Singh, Adv. Mr. Anirudh Singh, Adv. Mr. Rakesh Dahiya, AOR Mr. Aditya Dahiya, Adv. Mr. Kapil Dahiya, Adv. Mr. Satyavan Kudalwal, Adv. Mr. Praveen Swarup, AOR Mr. Sarad Kumar Singhania, AOR Mr. P. K. Jain, AOR Mr. Ajay Choudhary, AOR Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, AOR Mr. Abhijeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Anjali Saxena, Adv. 3

Mr. Gp. Capt. Karan Singh Bhati, AOR Mr. Bankey Bihari Sharma, AOR Mr. Ajit Kumar Thakur, Adv. Mr. R N Verma, Adv. Mr. Sanjay Misra, Adv. Mr. Mukul Kumar, AOR Mr. H. D. Thanvi, Adv. Mr. Rishi Matoliya, AOR Mr. Nikhil Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Raghuveer Pujari, Adv. Ms. Sumati Sharma, Adv. Ms. Parul Shukla, AOR Mr. Udayaditya Banerjee, Adv. Ms. Tanvi Chuphal, Adv. Ms. Shubhangi Pandey, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Adv. Ms. Deeksha Saggi, Adv. Mr. Rituparn Uniyal, Adv. Mr. B Tyagi, Adv. Mr. Nayyar Siddiqui, Adv. Mr. Ram Lal Roy, AOR For Respondent(s) Dr. Manish Singhvi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Milind Kumar, AOR Ms. Shubhangi Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Apurv Singhvi, Adv. Mr. Rohan Darade, Adv. Mr. Nikilesh Ramachandran, AOR Ms. Ruchi Kohli, AOR Mr. Sandeep Kumar Jha, AOR Mr. Ranbir Singh Yadav, AOR Mr. Prateek Yadav, Adv. Mr. Puran Mal Saini, Adv. Mr. Pati Raj Yadav, Adv. Ms. Akansha Singh Yadav, Adv. Mr. Ankit Yadav, Adv. Dr. Nirmal Chopra, AOR Ms. Pragati Neekhra, AOR Mr. Ram Nath, Adv. Ms. Kalpana Kumari, Adv. Dr. Sushil Balwada, AOR Mr. Mukul Kumar, AOR 4

Mr. R.K. Rathore, Adv. Mr. Sandeep Singh Dingra, Adv. Mr. Amit Kumar Chawla, Adv. Ms. Tanishka Grover, Adv. Mr. Niharika Dewivedi, Adv. Mr. Mahi Pal Singh, Adv. Ms. Manisha Chawla, Adv. Mr. T.R. Meena, Adv. Mr. Vijay Rathore, Adv. Mr. Satpal Singh, AOR Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Adv. Ms. Deeksha Saggi, Adv. Mr. Rituparn Uniyal, Adv. Mr. B Tyagi, Adv. Mr. Nayyar Siddiqui, Adv. Mr. Ram Lal Roy, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R 1. Arguments heard. 2. Judgment reserved. (ARJUN BISHT) (PREETHI T.C.) COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH) 5

1 ITEM NO.101 COURT NO.4 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal No(s).7906/2010 MAHESH CHAND BARETH & ANR. Appellant(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS. SECRETARY & ORS. Respondent(s) ([ GROUP MATTER ] [FOR FURTHER HEARING ] IA No. 14736/2023 - EARLY HEARING APPLICATION IA No. 119366/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 82640/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 129636/2023 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 10227/2018 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 129600/2023 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 64052/2022 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 119365/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES IA No. 82639/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) WITH SLP(C) No. 34742/2013 (XV) C.A. No. 8656-8668/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 9618/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 10709/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 10712/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 10711/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 10710/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 6898/2012 (XV) C.A. No. 1668/2012 (XV) C.A. No. 1038/2012 (XV) (FOR APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS ON IA 39221/2022 FOR DISCHARGE OF ADVOCATE ON RECORD ON IA 83018/2022 IA No. 39221/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 105545/2022 - DISCHARGE OF ADVOCATE ON RECORD IA No. 83018/2022 - DISCHARGE OF ADVOCATE ON RECORD) C.A. No. 11332/2011 (XV) (FOR ON IA 3/2013 FOR INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT ON IA 87186/2017 FOR impleading party ON IA 104886/2017 IA No. 104886/2017 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 87186/2017 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT) C.A. No. 11442/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 11407/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 4559/2012 (XV) C.A. No. 6096-6104/2012 (XV) C.A. No. 8661/2012 (XV) (FOR APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS ON IA 39217/2022

2 IA No. 39217/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS) SLP(C) No. 34663/2013 (XV) C.A. No. 322/2013 (XV) C.A. No. 9328-9331/2010 (XV) C.A. No. 10281/2010 (XV) C.A. No. 2800-2802/2011 (XV) ( FOR APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS ON IA 39270/2022 IA No. 39270/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS) C.A. No. 2806-2808/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2803/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2804-2805/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2980/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2978/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2979/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2976/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2977/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 4569/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 3732/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 5180/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 5183/2011 (XV) IA No. 157787/2023 - APPLICATION FOR TRANSPOSITION) C.A. No. 3731/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 5182/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 7646/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 1210/2012 (XV) C.A. No. 8302/2010 (XV) C.A. No. 2982/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2981/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2921/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 3730/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 4688/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 4745/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 5258/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 8215/2013 (XV) Date : 28-02-2024 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.V. VISWANATHAN For Appellant(s) Mr. Saurabh Jain, Adv. Mr. P. K. Jain, AOR Mr. PK Goswami, Adv. Mr. SP Singh Rathore, Adv. Mr. Arunansh Bharti Goswami, Adv. Mr. Ajay Choudhary, AOR Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, AOR Mr. Sushil Kumar Jain, Sr. Adv. Ms. Pratibha Jain, AOR

3 Mr. Puneet Jain, Adv. Mrs. Christi Jain, Adv. Mr. Mann Arora, Adv. Ms. Akriti Sharma, Adv. Ms. Lisha Bhati, Adv. Mr. Rakesh Dahiya, AOR Mr. Aditya Dahiya, Adv. Mr. Veerendra Kumar, Adv. Mr. Praveen Swarup, AOR Ms. Pareena Swarup, Adv. Mr. Ameet Siingh, Adv. Ms. Payal Swarup, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tomar, Adv. Mr. K.p. Singh, Adv. Mr. Chandra Pratap Singh, Adv. Mr. Ravi Kumar, Adv. Mr. Syed Jafar Husain, Adv. Mr. Devesh Maurya, Adv. Mr. Sarad Kumar Singhania, AOR Mr. H. D. Thanvi, Adv. Mr. Rishi Matoliya, AOR Mr. Nikhil Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Raghuveer Pujari, Adv. Ms. Archana Pathak Dave, Sr. Adv. Ms. Chitrangda Rastravara, Adv. Mr. Aishwary Mishra, Adv. Mr. Dhananjai Shekhwat, Adv. Mr. Dashrath Singh, Adv. Mr. Anirudh Singh, Adv. Mr. Abhijeet Singh, Adv. Ms. Anjali Saxena, Adv. Gp. Capt. Karan Singh Bhati, AOR Mr. Ajit Kumar Thakur, Adv. Ms. Kalpana Kumari, Adv. Mr. Bankey Bihari Sharma, AOR Mr. Mukul Kumar, AOR Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Adv. Ms. Deeksha Saggi, Adv. Mr. Rituparn Uniyal, Adv. Mr. B Tyagi, Adv. Mr. Nayyar Siddiqui, Adv. Mr. Ram Lal Roy, AOR

4 Ms. Parul Shukla, AOR Ms. Shubhangi Pandey, Adv. Ms. Tanvi Chuphal, Adv. For Respondent(s) Dr. Manish Singhvi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Milind Kumar, AOR Ms. Shubhangi Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Apurv Singhvi, Adv. Mr. Rohan Darade, Adv. Ms. Pragati Neekhra, AOR Dr. Sushil Balwada, AOR Mr. Ram Nath, Adv. Mr. Nandlal Kumar Mishra, Adv. Mr. Srilok Nath Rath, Adv. Ms. Reena Rao, Adv. Dr. Nirmal Chopra, AOR Ms. Ruchi Kohli, AOR Mr. Ranbir Singh Yadav, AOR Mr. Prateek Yadav, Adv. Mr. Puran Mal Saini, Adv. Mr. Pati Raj Yadav, Adv. Ms. Akansha Singh Yadav, Adv. Mr. Mukul Kumar, AOR Mr. Nikilesh Ramachandran, AOR Mr. R.K. Rathore, Adv. Mr. Sandeep Singh Dingra, Adv. Mr. Amit Kumar Chawla, Adv. Ms. Tanishka Grover, Adv. Mr. Niharika Dewivedi, Adv. Mr. Mahi Pal Singh, Adv. Ms. Manisha Chawla, Adv. Mr. T.R. Meena, Adv. Mr. Vijay Rathore, Adv. Mr. Satpal Singh, AOR Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Adv. Ms. Deeksha Saggi, Adv. Mr. Rituparn Uniyal, Adv. Mr. B Tyagi, Adv. Mr. Nayyar Siddiqui, Adv. Mr. Ram Lal Roy, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R

5 Arguments heard, which remained inconclusive. For further arguments, list on 29.02.2024. (SATISH KUMAR YADAV) (PREETHI T.C.) DEPUTY REGISTRAR COURT MASTER (NSH)

1 ITEM NO.102 COURT NO.4 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal No(s).7906/2010 MAHESH CHAND BARETH & ANR. Appellant(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN SECRETARY & ORS. Respondent(s) ([ GROUP MATTER ] IA No. 14736/2023 - EARLY HEARING APPLICATION IA No. 119366/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 82640/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 10227/2018 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 129636/2023 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 129600/2023 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 64052/2022 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 119365/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES IA No. 82639/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES WITH SLP(C) No. 34742/2013 (XV) C.A. No. 8656-8668/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 9618/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 10709/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 10712/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 10711/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 10710/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 6898/2012 (XV) C.A. No. 1668/2012 (XV) C.A. No. 1038/2012 (XV) (FOR APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS ON IA 39221/2022 FOR DISCHARGE OF ADVOCATE ON RECORD ON IA 83018/2022 IA No. 39221/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 105545/2022 - DISCHARGE OF ADVOCATE ON RECORD IA No. 83018/2022 - DISCHARGE OF ADVOCATE ON RECORD) C.A. No. 11332/2011 (XV) (FOR ON IA 3/2013 FOR INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT ON IA 87186/2017 FOR impleading party ON IA 104886/2017 IA No. 104886/2017 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 87186/2017 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT) C.A. No. 11442/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 11407/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 4559/2012 (XV) C.A. No. 6096-6104/2012 (XV) C.A. No. 8661/2012 (XV) (FOR APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS ON IA 39217/2022

2 IA No. 39217/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS) SLP(C) No. 34663/2013 (XV) C.A. No. 322/2013 (XV) C.A. No. 9328-9331/2010 (XV) C.A. No. 10281/2010 (XV) C.A. No. 2800-2802/2011 (XV) (FOR APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS ON IA 39270/2022 IA No. 39270/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS) C.A. No. 2806-2808/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2803/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2804-2805/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2980/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2978/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2979/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2976/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2977/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 4569/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 3732/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 5180/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 5183/2011 (XV) IA No. 157787/2023 - APPLICATION FOR TRANSPOSITION) C.A. No. 3731/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 5182/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 7646/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 1210/2012 (XV) C.A. No. 8302/2010 (XV) C.A. No. 2982/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2981/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2921/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 3730/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 4688/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 4745/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 5258/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 8215/2013 (XV) Date : 22-02-2024 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.V. VISWANATHAN For Appellant(s) Mr. Sushil Kr.Jain, Sr.Adv. Mr. Puneet Jain, Adv. Ms. Lisha Bhatia, Adv. Ms. Archana Pathak Dave, Sr. Adv. Ms. Chitrangda Rastravara, Adv. Mr. Aishwary Mishra, Adv. Mr. Dhananjai Shekhwat, Adv. Mr. Dashrath Singh, Adv. Mr. Anirudh Singh, Adv. Mr. Abhijeet Singh, Adv. Ms. Anjali Saxena, Adv.

3 Gp. Capt. Karan Singh Bhati, AOR Mr. Rakesh Dahiya, AOR Mr. Aditya Dahiya, Adv. Mr. Kapil Dahiya, Adv. Mr. Satyavan Kudalwal, Adv. Mr. Akshat Jain, Adv. Mr. Praveen Swarup, AOR Ms. Pareena Swarup, Adv. Mr. Ameet Siingh, Adv. Ms. Payal Swarup, Adv. Mr. K.P. Singh, Adv. Mr. Ravi Kumar, Adv. Mr. Syed Jafar Husain, Adv. Mr. Devesh Maurya, Adv. Mr. Sarad Kumar Singhania, AOR Mr. P. K. Jain, AOR Mr. Ajay Choudhary, AOR Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, AOR Ms. Pratibha Jain, AOR Mr. Bankey Bihari Sharma, AOR Mr. Mukul Kumar, AOR Mr. Rishi Matoliya, AOR Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Adv. Ms. Deeksha Saggi, Adv. Mr. Rituparn Uniyal, Adv. Mr. B Tyagi, Adv. Mr. K Anil Singh, Adv. Mr. Nayyar Siddiqui, Adv. Mr. Ram Lal Roy, AOR Ms. Parul Shukla, AOR For Respondent(s) Dr. Manish Singhvi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sandeep Kumar Jha, AOR Dr. Manish Singhvi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Milind Kumar, AOR Ms. Shubhangi Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Apurv Singhvi, Adv. Mr. Rohan Darade, Adv.

4 Ms. Pragati Neekhra, AOR Dr. Sushil Balwada, AOR Dr. Nirmal Chopra, AOR Mr. Nikilesh Ramachandran, AOR Ms. Ruchi Kohli, AOR Mr. Ranbir Singh Yadav, AOR Mr. Prateek Yadav, Adv. Mrs. Pratima Yadav, Adv. Mr. Puran Mal Saini, Adv. Mr. Pati Raj Yadav, Adv. Mr. Mukul Kumar, AOR Mr. Satpal Singh, AOR Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Adv. Ms. Deeksha Saggi, Adv. Mr. Rituparn Uniyal, Adv. Mr. B Tyagi, Adv. Mr. K Anil Singh, Adv. Mr. Nayyar Siddiqui, Adv. Mr. Ram Lal Roy, AOR Mr. H.D.Thanvi, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Rishi Matoliya, Adv. Mr. Raghuveer Pujari, Adv. Ms. S.Sharma, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Arguments heard, which remained inconclusive. For further arguments, list on 28.02.2024. (SATISH KUMAR YADAV) (PREETHI T.C.) DEPUTY REGISTRAR COURT MASTER (NSH)

1 ITEM NO.102 COURT NO.4 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal No(s).7906/2010 MAHESH CHAND BARETH & ANR. Appellant(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS. SECRETARY & ORS. Respondent(s) ([GROUP MATTER] IA No. 14736/2023 - EARLY HEARING APPLICATION IA No. 82640/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 119366/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 10227/2018 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 129636/2023 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 129600/2023 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 64052/2022 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 82639/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES IA No. 119365/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) WITH SLP(C) No. 34742/2013 (XV) C.A. No. 8656-8668/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 9618/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 10709/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 10712/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 10711/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 10710/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 6898/2012 (XV) C.A. No. 1668/2012 (XV) C.A. No. 1038/2012 (XV) (FOR APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS ON IA 39221/2022 FOR DISCHARGE OF ADVOCATE ON RECORD ON IA 83018/2022 IA No. 39221/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 105545/2022 - DISCHARGE OF ADVOCATE ON RECORD IA No. 83018/2022 - DISCHARGE OF ADVOCATE ON RECORD) C.A. No. 11332/2011 (XV) (FOR ON IA 3/2013 FOR INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT ON IA 87186/2017 FOR impleading party ON IA 104886/2017 IA No. 104886/2017 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 87186/2017 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT) C.A. No. 11442/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 11407/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 4559/2012 (XV) C.A. No. 6096-6104/2012 (XV) C.A. No. 8661/2012 (XV)

2 (FOR APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS ON IA 39217/2022 IA No. 39217/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS) SLP(C) No. 34663/2013 (XV) C.A. No. 322/2013 (XV) C.A. No. 9328-9331/2010 (XV) C.A. No. 10281/2010 (XV) C.A. No. 2800-2802/2011 (XV) (FOR APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS ON IA 39270/2022 IA No. 39270/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS) C.A. No. 2806-2808/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2803/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2804-2805/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2980/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2978/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2979/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2976/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2977/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 4569/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 3732/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 5180/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 5183/2011 (XV) IA No. 157787/2023 - APPLICATION FOR TRANSPOSITION) C.A. No. 3731/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 5182/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 7646/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 1210/2012 (XV) C.A. No. 8302/2010 (XV) C.A. No. 2982/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2981/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2921/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 3730/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 4688/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 4745/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 5258/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 8215/2013 (XV) Date : 14-02-2024 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.V. VISWANATHAN For Appellant(s) Ms. Archana Pathak Dave, Sr. Adv. Ms. Chitrangda Rastravara, Adv. Mr. Aishwary Mishra, Adv. Mr. Dhananjai Shekhwat, Adv. Mr. Dashrath Singh, Adv. Mr. Anirudh Singh, Adv. Mr. Abhijeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Gp. Capt. Karan Singh Bhati, AOR Mr. Rakesh Dahiya, AOR Mr. Satyavan Kudalwal, Adv.

3 Mr. Aditya Dahiya, Adv. Mr. Kapil Dahiya, Adv. Mr. Rishabh Sharma, Adv. Mr. S.K. Jain, Sr.Adv. Mr. Puneet Jain, Adv. Mr. Praveen Swarup, AOR Ms. Pareena Swarup, Adv. Mr. Ameet Siingh, Adv. Ms. Payal Swarup, Adv. Mr. Devesh Maurya, Adv. Mr. K.p. Singh, Adv. Mr. Ravi Kumar, Adv. Mr. Sarad Kumar Singhania, AOR Mr. P. K. Jain, AOR Mr. Ajay Choudhary, AOR Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, AOR Ms. Pratibha Jain, AOR Mr. Bankey Bihari Sharma, AOR Mr. Ajit Kumar Thakur, Adv. Mr. Ram Nath Verma, Adv. Mr. Naveen Kapoor, Adv. Mr. Anil Kumar Varshney, Adv. Mr. Mukul Kumar, AOR Mr. Rishi Matoliya, AOR Mr. Nikhil Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Raghuveer Pujari, Adv. Mr. Rajnish Sharma, Adv. Ms. Sumati Sharma, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Adv. Ms. Deeksha Saggi, Adv. Mr. Rituparn Uniyal, Adv. Mr. K Anil Singh, Adv. Mr. B Tyagi, Adv. Mr. Nayyar Siddiqui, Adv. Mr. Ram Lal Roy, AOR Ms. Parul Shukla, AOR Mr. Udayaditya Banerjee, Adv. Ms. Shreya Bhojnagarwala, Adv. Ms. Shubhangi Pandey, Adv. Ms. Tanvi Chuphal, Adv. For Respondent(s) Dr. Manish Singhvi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Milind Kumar, AOR Ms. Shubhangi Agarwal, Adv.

4 Mr. Apurv Singhvi, Adv. Mr. Rohan Darade, Adv. Mr. Nikilesh Ramachandran, AOR Ms. Ruchi Kohli, AOR Dr. Manish Singhvi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sandeep Kumar Jha, AOR Ms. Pragati Neekhra, AOR Dr. Sushil Balwada, AOR Dr. Nirmal Chopra, AOR Mr. Ranbir Singh Yadav, AOR Mr. Prateek Yadav, Adv. Mrs. Pratima Yadav, Adv. Ms. Akansha Singh Yadav, Adv. Mr. Ankit Yadav, Adv. Mr. Yogesh Yadav, Adv. Mr. Pati Raj Yadav, Adv. Mr. Mukul Kumar, AOR Mr. R.K. Rathore, Adv. Mr. Sandeep Singh Dingra, Adv. Mr. Amit Kumar Chawla, Adv. Ms. Tanishka Grover, Adv. Mr. Mahi Pal Singh, Adv. Ms. Manisha Chawla, Adv. Ms. T.S. Meena, Adv. Mr. Satpal Singh, AOR Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Adv. Ms. Deeksha Saggi, Adv. Mr. Rituparn Uniyal, Adv. Mr. K Anil Singh, Adv. Mr. B Tyagi, Adv. Mr. Nayyar Siddiqui, Adv. Mr. Ram Lal Roy, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Arguments heard, which remained inconclusive. For further arguments, list on 15.02.2024. (SATISH KUMAR YADAV) (PREETHI T.C.) DEPUTY REGISTRAR COURT MASTER (NSH)

C.A. NO. 8215/2013 ITEM NO.108 COURT NO.11 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CIVIL APPEAL NO. 8215/2013 SURESH CHAND JAIN APPELLANT(S) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) Date : 10-08-2023 This appeal was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL For Appellant(s) Mr. Rajender Sone, Adv. Mr. Saurabh Jain, Adv. Mr. P.K. Goswami, Adv. Mr. Arunansh Bharti Goswami, Adv. Mr. S.P.S. Rathore, Adv. Mr. P. K. Jain, AOR For Respondent(s) Dr. Manish Singhvi, Sr. Adv. Ms. Shubhangi Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Apurv S., Adv. Mr. Milind Kumar, AOR UPON hearing the counsel, the Court made the following O R D E R 1. Learned counsel for the respondents informs this Court that a similar matter being registered as Civil Appeal No. 7906 of 2010, titled ‘ Mahesh Chand Bareth and Anr. vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. ’, was listed before an another Bench as recently as on 26 th July, 2023, and it is 1

C.A. NO. 8215/2013 requested that this appeal may also be tagged with the said matter. 2. In view of the submission made, tag the present appeal with Civil Appeal No. 7906 of 2010. (POOJA SHARMA) (NAND KISHOR) COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH) 2

ITEM NO.103 COURT NO.5 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal No(s).7906/2010 MAHESH CHAND BARETH & ANR. Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (IA No.14736/2023 - EARLY HEARING APPLICATION, IA No.119366/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T., IA No.82640/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T., IA No.129600/2023 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION, IA No.10227/2018 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION, IA No.129636/2023 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION, IA No.64052/2022 – INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT, IA No.119365/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES, IA No.82639/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) WITH SLP(C) No. 34742/2013 (XV) C.A. No. 8656-8668/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 9618/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 10709/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 10712/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 10711/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 10710/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 6898/2012 (XV) C.A. No. 1668/2012 (XV) C.A. No.1038/2012 (XV) (IA No.39221/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No.105545/2022 - DISCHARGE OF ADVOCATE ON RECORD, IA No.83018/2022 - DISCHARGE OF ADVOCATE ON RECORD) C.A. No.11332/2011 (XV) (IA No.104886/2017 – INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT, IA No.87186/2017 – INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT) C.A. No. 11442/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 11407/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 4559/2012 (XV) C.A. No. 6096-6104/2012 (XV) C.A. No. 8661/2012 (XV) (IA No.39217/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS) SLP(C) No. 34663/2013 (XV) C.A. No. 322/2013 (XV) C.A. No. 9328-9331/2010 (XV) C.A. No. 10281/2010 (XV) 1

C.A. No. 2800-2802/2011 (XV) (IA No.39270/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS) C.A. No. 2806-2808/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2803/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2804-2805/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2980/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2978/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2979/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2976/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2977/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 4569/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 3732/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 5180/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 5183/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 3731/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 5182/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 7646/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 1210/2012 (XV) C.A. No. 8302/2010 (XV) C.A. No. 2982/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2981/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2921/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 3730/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 4688/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 4745/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 5258/2011 (XV) Date : 26-07-2023 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA For Appellant(s) Mr. P. K. Jain, AOR Mr. Ajay Choudhary, AOR Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, AOR Ms. Pratibha Jain, AOR Mr. Rakesh Dahiya, AOR Mr. Praveen Swarup, AOR Ms. Pareena Swarup, Adv. Ms. Payal Swarup, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tomar, Adv. Mr. Devesh Maurya, Adv. Ms. Pratishtha Majumdar, Adv. Mr. Chandra Pratap Singh, Adv. Mr. K.p. Singh, Adv. Mr. Sarad Kumar Singhania, AOR Mr. Mukul Kumar, AOR Mr. Rishi Matoliya, AOR 2

Mrs. V. Mohana, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gp. Capt. Karan Singh Bhati, AOR Ms. Chitrangda Rastravara, Adv. Mr. Aishwary Mishra, Adv. Mr. Dashrath Singh, Adv. Mr. Bankey Bihari Sharma, AOR Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Adv. Ms. Deeksha Saggi, Adv. Mr. Rituparn Uniyal, Adv. Mr. K Anil Singh, Adv. Mr. B Tyagi, Adv. Mr. Ram Lal Roy, AOR Ms. Parul Shukla, AOR Mr. Udayaditya Banerjee, Adv. Ms. Shreya Bhojnagarwala, Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Pragati Neekhra, AOR Mr. Aditya Bhanu Neekhra, Adv. Dr. Sushil Balwada, AOR Mr. Srilok Nath Rath, Adv. Mr. Nandlal Kumar Mishra, Adv. Ms. Reena Rao, Adv. Ms. Akansha Rai, Adv. Ms. Apeksha Rai, Adv. Mr. Pramod Kumar, Adv. Mr. Vivekanand Rana, Adv. Dr. Nirmal Chopra, AOR Mr. Nikilesh Ramachandran, AOR Ms. Ruchi Kohli, AOR Dr. Manish Singhvi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sandeep Kumar Jha, AOR Ms. Shubamgi Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Arpit Prakash, Adv. Mr. Ranbir Singh Yadav, AOR Mr. Prateek Yadav, Adv. Mrs. Pratima Yadav, Adv. Ms. Anzu K. Varkey, Adv. Mr. Yogesh Yadav, Adv. Mr. Mukul Kumar, AOR Dr. Manish Singhvi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Arpit Parkash, Adv. Ms. Shubhangi Agarwal, Adv. 3

Mr. Apurv S., Adv. Mr. Milind Kumar, AOR Mr. Satpal Singh, AOR Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Adv. Ms. Deeksha Saggi, Adv. Mr. Rituparn Uniyal, Adv. Mr. K Anil Singh, Adv. Mr. B Tyagi, Adv. Mr. Ram Lal Roy, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Post the matters tomorrow i.e., 27.07.2023 as Item No.102. (ARJUN BISHT) (PREETHI T.C.) COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH) 4

ITEM NO.108 COURT NO.14 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 5258/2011 RAJENDRA KUMAR SAIN APPELLANT(S) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN . & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) Date : 13-07-2023 This appeal was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL For Appellant(s) Ms. Pratibha Jain, AOR For Respondent(s) Ms. Ruchi Kohli, AOR UPON hearing the counsel, the Court made the following O R D E R 1. Learned counsel for the appellant states that the selection process, which is the subject matter of the present appeal, is under consideration in several other appeals pending before this Court. He hands over a copy of the order passed in C.A. No. 4688/2011, which is taken on record. 2. The present appeal is directed to be tagged with the captioned matter. (POOJA SHARMA) (NAND KISHOR) COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH)

ITEM NO.109 + 112 COURT NO.15 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal No(s). 4688/2011 MANOJ KUMAR SHARMA Appellant(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) with Civil Appeal No. 4745 of 2011 Date : 11-05-2023 These appeals were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.K. MAHESHWARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. SUNDRESH For Appellant(s) Ms. Chitrangda Rashtravara, Adv. Mr. Gp. Capt. Karan Singh Bhati, AOR Mr. Sushil Kumar Jain, Sr. Adv. Ms. Pratibha Jain, AOR (in Civil Appeal No. 4745 of 2011) (Appearance slip not given) For Respondent(s) Ms. Shubhangi Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Milind Kumar, AOR Ms. Ruchi Kohli, AOR Mr. Nikilesh Ramachandran, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Let both the matters [Civil Appeal No. 4688 of 2011 and Civil Appeal No. 4745 of 2011] be tagged together and be listed along with Civil Appeal No. 1668 of 2012. (JAYANT KUMAR ARORA) (R.S. NARAYANAN) ASST. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER

1 ITEM NO.105 COURT NO.7 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal No(s).7906/2010 MAHESH CHAND BARETH & ANR. Appellant(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS. SECRETARY & ORS. Respondent(s) IA No.14736/2023 - EARLY HEARING APPLICATION IA No.119366/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No.82640/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No.10227/2018 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No.64052/2022 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No.119365/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES IA No.82639/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES WITH SLP(C) No.34742/2013 (XV) C.A. No.8656-8668/2011 (XV) C.A. No.9618/2011 (XV) C.A. No.10709/2011 (XV) C.A. No.10712/2011 (XV) C.A. No.10711/2011 (XV) C.A. No.10710/2011 (XV) C.A. No.6898/2012 (XV) C.A. No.1668/2012 (XV) C.A. No.1038/2012 (XV) (FOR APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS ON IA 39221/2022 FOR DISCHARGE OF ADVOCATE ON RECORD ON IA 83018/2022 IA No. 39221/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 105545/2022 - DISCHARGE OF ADVOCATE ON RECORD IA No. 83018/2022 - DISCHARGE OF ADVOCATE ON RECORD) C.A. No. 11332/2011 (XV) (FOR ON IA 3/2013 FOR INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT ON IA 87186/2017 FOR impleading party ON IA 104886/2017 IA No. 104886/2017 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 87186/2017 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT) C.A.No.11442/2011 (XV) C.A.No.11407/2011 (XV) C.A.No.4559/2012 (XV) C.A.No.6096-6104/2012 (XV) C.A.No.8661/2012 (XV) (FOR APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS ON IA 39217/2022 IA No. 39217/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS) SLP(C) No.34663/2013 (XV)

2 C.A. No. 322/2013 (XV) C.A. No. 9328-9331/2010 (XV) C.A. No. 10281/2010 (XV) C.A. No. 2800-2802/2011 (XV) (FOR APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS ON IA 39270/2022 IA No. 39270/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS) C.A. No. 2806-2808/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2803/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2804-2805/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2980/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2978/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2979/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2976/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2977/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 4569/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 3732/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 5180/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 5183/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 3731/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 5182/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 7646/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 1210/2012 (XV) C.A. No. 8302/2010 (XV) C.A. No. 2982/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2981/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2921/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 3730/2011 (XV) Date : 11-05-2023 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA For Appellant(s) Ms. V.Mohana, Sr.Adv. Ms. Chitrangda Rastravara, Adv. Mr. Aishwary Mishra, Adv. Ms. Zaya Firdaus, Adv. Ms. Sneha Botwe, Adv. Mr. K. Chandra Mohan, Adv. Ms. Bhavya Pande, Adv. Ms. Vibha Datta Makhija, Sr.Adv. Mr. Udayaditya Banerjee, Adv. Ms. Shreya Bhojnagarwala, Adv. Mr. Praveen Gaur, Adv. Mr. Karan M., Adv. Mr. Sushil Kumar Jain, Sr.Adv. Mr. Yogit Kamat, Adv. Ms. Shruti Singh, Adv. Mr. Umang Mehta, Adv.

3 Mr. Mann Arora, Adv. Ms. Akriti Sharma, Adv. Mr. Rakesh Dahiya, AOR Mr. Praveen Swarup, AOR Mr. Sarad Kumar Singhania, AOR Mr. P. K. Jain, AOR Mr. Ajay Choudhary, AOR Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, AOR Mr. Rahul Gupta, Adv. Mr. Bankey Bihari Sharma, AOR Mr. Ajit Kumar Thakur, Adv. Mr. Mukul Kumar, AOR Mr. Rishi Matoliya, AOR Mr. Nikhil Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Pavan Sharma, Adv. Mr. Raghuveer Pujari, Adv. Ms. Sumati Sharma, Adv. Mr. Ram Lal Roy, AOR Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Adv. Ms. Deeksha Saggi, Adv. Mr. Rituparn Uniyal, Adv. Mr. M V Ramana, Adv. Mr. P Vidyadhar, Adv. For Respondent(s) Dr. Manish Singhvi, Sr. Adv. Ms. Shubhangi Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Sandeep Kumar Jha, AOR Mr. Ashok Basoya, Adv. Ms. Shubhamgi Agarwal, Adv. Dr. Manish Singhvi, Sr. Adv. Ms. Shubhangi Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Milind Kumar, AOR Ms. Pragati Neekhra, AOR Dr. Sushil Balwada, AOR Mr. Nandlal Kumar Mishra, Adv. Mr. Pramod Kumar, Adv. Mr. Vivekanand Rana, Adv. Dr. Nirmal Chopra, AOR

4 Ms. Ruchi Kohli, AOR Mr. Ranbir Singh Yadav, AOR Mr. Prateek Yadav, Adv. Mrs. Pratima Yadav, Adv. Mr. Puran Mal Saini, Adv. Ms. Anzu K. Varkey, Adv. Mr. Ritesh Patil, Adv. Mr. Yogesh Yadav, Adv. Mr. Mukul Kumar, AOR Mr. Satpal Singh, AOR Mr. Ram Lal Roy, AOR Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Adv. Ms. Deeksha Saggi, Adv. Mr. Rituparn Uniyal, Adv. Mr. M V Ramana, Adv. Mr. P Vidyadhar, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent – State of Rajasthan seeks time to take latest instructions. Post these matters for hearing on 26.07.2023. (SATISH KUMAR YADAV) (PREETHI T.C.) DEPUTY REGISTRAR COURT MASTER (NSH)

1 ITEM NO.115 COURT NO.6 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal No(s). 7906/2010 MAHESH CHAND BARETH & ANR. Appellant(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS. SECRETARY & ORS. Respondent(s) IA No. 10227/2018 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 64052/2022 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 82639/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) WITH C.A. No. 8656-8668/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 9618/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 10709/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 10712/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 10711/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 10710/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 11332/2011 (XV) FOR ON IA 3/2013 FOR INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT ON IA 87186/2017 FOR impleading party ON IA 104886/2017 IA No. 104886/2017 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 87186/2017 – INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT) C.A. No. 11442/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 11407/2011 (XV) SLP(C) No. 34742/2013 (XV) C.A. No. 2800-2802/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2804-2805/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2976/2011 (XV)

2 C.A. No. 2977/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 5183/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 5182/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 7646/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 6898/2012 (XV) C.A. No. 1668/2012 (XV) C.A. No. 1038/2012 (XV) ( FOR APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS ON IA 39221/2022 FOR DISCHARGE OF ADVOCATE ON RECORD ON IA 83018/2022 IA No. 39221/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 83018/2022 - DISCHARGE OF ADVOCATE ON RECORD) C.A. No. 1210/2012 (XV) C.A. No. 4559/2012 (XV) C.A. No. 6096-6104/2012 (XV) C.A. No. 8661/2012 (XV) SLP(C) No. 34663/2013 (XV) C.A. No. 322/2013 (XV) C.A. No. 9328-9331/2010 (XV) ( and IA No.14889/2018-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.) C.A. No. 8302/2010 (XV) C.A. No. 10281/2010 (XV) C.A. No. 2806-2808/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2803/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2982/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2980/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2978/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2979/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2981/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 2921/2011 (XV)

3 C.A. No. 3730/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 4569/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 3732/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 5180/2011 (XV) C.A. No. 3731/2011 (XV) Date : 28-07-2022 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. ABDUL NAZEER HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.K. MAHESHWARI For Appellant(s) Mr. Rakesh Dahiya, AOR Mr. Praveen Swarup, AOR Mr. Sarad Kumar Singhania, AOR Mr. P. K. Jain, AOR Mr. Ajay Choudhary, AOR Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, AOR Ms. Pratibha Jain, AOR Ms. Meenakshi Arora, Sr. Adv. Ms. Chitrangda Rastravara, Adv. Mr. Manvendra Singh, Adv. Mr. Dashrath Singh, Adv. Mr. Abhijeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Gp. Capt. Karan Singh Bhati, AOR Mr. Bankey Bihari Sharma, AOR Mr. Mukul Kumar, AOR Mr. Rishi Matoliya, AOR Mr. H.D. Thanvi, Adv. Mr. Achal Singh Bule, Adv. Ms. Sumati sharma, Adv. Ms. Smriti S., Adv, Mr. Nikhil Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Bharnagar, Sr. Adv. Ms. Parul Shukla, AOR

4 Mr. Abhishek Kumar, adv. Ms. Deeksha Saggi, Adv. Ms. Rituparn uniyal, Adv. Mr. Ram Lal Roy, AOR For Respondent(s) Dr. Nirmal Chopra, AOR Ms. Pragati Neekhra, AOR Mr. Bhupender Pratap Singh, Adv. Mr. Satbir singh, Adv. Mr. Srilok Nath Rath, Adv. Dr. Sushil Balwada, AOR Mr. Mukul Kumar, AOR Dr. Manish Singhvi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Anishi Roy, Adv. Mr. Milind Kumar, AOR Ms. Ruchi Kohli, AOR Mr. Sandeep Kumar Jha, AOR Mr. Ranbir Singh Yadav, AOR Mr. Satpal Singh, AOR Mr. Ram Lal Roy, AOR Ms. Deepanwita Priyanka, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R As prayed matter is adjourned. List after four weeks. (NEELAM GULATI) (KAMLESH RAWAT) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)

ITEM NO.115 COURT NO.7 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal No(s). 7906/2010 MAHESH CHAND BARETH & ANR. Appellant(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS. Respondent(s) ([ list the matter before a bench comprising hon'ble mr. justice s. abdul nazeer ]) WITH SLP(C) Nos. 34742/2013, 34663/2013 C.A. No. 11332/2011 (IA No. 104886/2017 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 87186/2017 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT) C.A. Nos.11442/2011, 10711/2011, 10709/2011, 10710/2011, 10712/2011, 9618/2011, 8656-8668/2011, 11407/2011, 1038/2012, 8661/2012, 6898/2012, 322/2013, 6096-6104/2012, 1668/2012, 4559/2012, 1210/2012, 7646/2011, 5182/2011, 5183/2011, 2977/2011, 2976/2011, 2800-2802/2011, 2804-2805/2011, 2806-2808/2011, 2803/2011 and 10281/2010 C.A. No. 9328-9331/2010 (and IA No.14889/2018-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.) C.A. Nos.2978/2011, 2979/2011, 2980/2011, 5180/2011, 4569/2011, 3732/2011, 3730/2011, 3731/2011, 2921/2011, 2982/2011, 2981/2011 and 8302/2010 Date : 26-04-2022 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. ABDUL NAZEER HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM NATH For Appellant(s) Mr. Sushil Kumar Jain,Sr.Adv. Mr. Puneet Jain,Adv. Ms. Shruti Singh,Adv. Mr. Maan Arora,Adv. Mr. Yogit Kamat,Adv. Ms. Pratibha Jain, AOR Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, AOR Mr. Rakesh Dahiya, AOR 1

Mr. Praveen Swarup, AOR Mr. Sarad Kumar Singhania, AOR Mr. P. K. Jain, AOR Mr. Ajay Choudhary, AOR Ms. Swati Bansal,Adv. Ms. Vaishali Gupta,Adv. Mr. Rajinder Soni,Adv. Ms. Chitrangda Rastravara,Adv. Mr. Manvendra Singh,Adv. Mr. Dashrath Singh,Adv. Mr. Gp. Capt. Karan Singh Bhati, AOR Mr. Ajit Kumar Thakur,Adv. Mr. Ram Nath,Adv. Mr. Bankey Bihari Sharma, AOR Mr. Mukul Kumar, AOR Mr. Rishi Matoliya, AOR Mr. H.D.Thanvi,Adv. Ms. Sumati Sharma,Adv. Ms. Smriti Sandhu,Adv. Mr. Achar Singh Bule,Adv. Ms. Parul Shukla, AOR Ms. Kirti Aggarwal,Adv. Mr. Ram Lal Roy, AOR For Respondent(s) Dr. Nirmal Chopra, AOR Ms. Pragati Neekhra, AOR Dr. Sushil Balwada, AOR Mr. Sandeep Kumar Jha, AOR Mr. Ranbir Singh Yadav, AOR Mr. Mukul Kumar, AOR Mr. Arpit Parkash,Adv. Mr. Milind Kumar, AOR Ms. Ruchi Kohli, AOR Mr. Satpal Singh, AOR 2

Mr. Ram Lal Roy, AOR Ms. Beena Goyal,Adv. Mr. Hitesh Kumar Sharma,Adv. Mr. Akhileshwar Jha,Adv. Mr. E.Vinay Kumar,Adv. Ms. Meenakshi Chopra,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R At the request of the learned counsel for the parties, list these matters on 28th July, 2022. (ANITA MALHOTRA) (KAMLESH RAWAT) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER 3

ITEM NO.1 Court 1 (Video Conferencing) SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal No. 7906/2010 MAHESH CHAND BARETH & ANR. Appellant(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN ORS. SECRETARY & ORS. Respondent(s) (IA No. 23865/2022 - EARLY HEARING APPLICATION) Date : 11-03-2022 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI For Appellant(s) Ms. Chitrangda Rastravara, Adv. Mr. Manvendra Singh, Adv. Ms. Ameya Thanvi, Adv. Ms. Manisha Chava, Adv. Mr. Dashrath Singh, Adv. Mr. Gp. Capt. Karan Singh Bhati, AOR Mr. Mukul Kumar, AOR Mr. Rishi Matoliya, AOR For Respondent(s) Dr. Manish Singhvi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Arpit Parkash, Adv. Mr. Milind Kumar, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List the matter before a Bench comprising Hon’ble Mr. Justice S. Abdul Nazeer. IA No. 23865/2022 seeking early hearing is disposed of. (RAJNI MUKHI) (R.S. NARAYANAN) COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH)

ITEM NO.3 Court 1 (Video Conferencing) SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal No(s).7906/2010 MAHESH CHAND BARETH & ANR. Appellant(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS. SECRETARY & ORS. Respondent(s) IA No.54535/2021 - EARLY HEARING APPLICATION Date : 26-07-2021 This matter was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA For Appellant(s) Ms. Chitrangda Rastravara, Adv. Mr. Manvendra Singh Rathore, Adv. Ms. Ameya Thanvi, Adv. Ms. Manisha Chava, Adv. Mr. Dashrath Singh, Adv. For Gp. Capt. Karan Singh Bhati, AOR Mr. Mukul Kumar, AOR Mr. Rishi Matoliya, AOR For Respondent(s) Dr. Manish Singhvi, Sr.Adv. Mr. Milind Kumar, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The Court is convened through Video Conferencing. This application has been filed on behalf of the appellants praying for early hearing of the main appeal. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Hearing expedited. I.A.No.54535/2021 stands disposed of accordingly. (SATISH KUMAR YADAV) (R.S. NARAYANAN) DEPUTY REGISTRAR COURT MASTER (NSH)

ITEM NO.810 COURT NO.2 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal No(s). 7906/2010 MAHESH CHAND BARETH & ANR. Appellant(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS. .Respondent(s) Date : 09-11-2017 This appeal was mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J. CHELAMESWAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. ABDUL NAZEER For Appellant(s) Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, AOR(Mentioned by) For Respondent(s) Ms. Ruchi Kohli, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List the matter on 23 rd January, 2018 before appropriate Bench. (OM PARKASH SHARMA) (RAJINDER KAUR) AR CUM PS BRANCH OFFICER (Listing proforma is placed on the file)

ITEM NO.2 COURT NO.10 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IA Nos.1/2015,2/2015,3/2015,4/2015,5/2015 in Civil Appeal No(s). 7906/2010 MAHESH CHAND BARETH & ANR. Appellant(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND Respondent(s) ORS. SECRETARY & ORS. WITH C.A. No. 11332/2011 (FOR ON IA 3/2013 for impleading party on IA 87186/2017) Date : 09-10-2017 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL [IN CHAMBER] For Appellant(s) Ms. Tanuja M. Putna, Adv. Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, AOR Mr. D.K. Thakur, Adv. Mr. Devendra Jha, Adv. Mr. Debasis Misra, AOR Mr. Rishi Matoliya, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Saurabh Shyam Shamsher, AAG Mr. Sandeep Singh, Adv. Mr. Amit Sharma, Adv. Ms.Ruchi Kohli, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Learned counsel appearing for the applicants state that the State went in appeal only against certain matters and not qua the applicants but the Judgment pronounced by the Division Bench is in-rem affecting even the applicants. On being asked to show as such, learned counsel requests for some time to examine the records. As prayed, list the matters after four weeks. (VISHAL ANAND) (SNEH LATA SHARMA) COURT MASTER (SH) BRANCH OFFICER

ITEM NO.4 COURT NO.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 Civil Appeal No(s).7906/2010 MAHESH CHAND BARETH & ANR. Appellant(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS. Respondent(s) (IA No.85328/2017-EARLY HEARING APPLICATION List only Application for early hearing in main matter i.e. C.A. No. 7906 of 2010 before the Hon'ble court.) Date : 22-09-2017 This appeal was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD For Appellant(s) Ms.Aishwarya Bhati, Adv. Mr.Jaideep Singh, Adv. Ms.Heena Khan, Adv. Mr.Mukul Kumar, AOR Ms.Rishi Matoliya, AOR Mr.Praveen Swarup, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr.Ruchi Kohli, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R I.A.No.85328/2017 in C.A.No.7906/2010 This is an application for early hearing. The Registry is directed to list the appeal in its own course. I.A.No.85328 of 2017 is accordingly disposed of. (Ashok Raj Singh) (H.S.Parasher) Court Master Assistant Registrar

ITEM NO.13 IN COURT NO.13 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. 12-23/2017 in Civil Appeal No(s). 6096-6104/2012 GAJENDRA GAUR & ORS.ETC.ETC. Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (for dispensing service of notice of lodgment on respondent/ petitioner and office report) Date : 03/04/2017 These applications were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD [IN CHAMBERS] For Appellant(s) Mr. Ajay Choudhary, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Milind Kumar, Adv. Mr. Mukul Kumar, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The petitioners sought the deletion of proforma respondent nos. 10 and 11 in Civil Appeal No. 6096 of 2012, proforma respondent nos. 6 and 9 in Civil Appeal No. 6097 of 2012, proforma respondent no. 4 in Civil Appeal No. 6099 of 2012 and proforma respondent nos. 4,7,10 and 11 in Civil Appeal No. 6103 of 2012. It is stated that these respondents were co-petitioners before the High Court and hence their presence is no longer necessary. The applications for deletion are, accordingly, allowed subject to all just exceptions. (LAYA RAWAT) (SHAKTI P. SHARMA ) SR.P.A. CO URT MASTER

Chamber Matter MATTER FOR: COURT NO. ITEM NO. [ SECTIONXV IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATIONS NOS. 1223 OF 2017 (Applications for dispensing with service of performa respondents) IN CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 60966104 OF 2012 GAJENDRA GAUR & ORS.ETC.ETC. ...APPELLANTS VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS OFFICE REPORT The matters abovementioned were listed before the Hon'ble Court on 24.08.2012, when the Court was pleased to pass the following Order: “ Leave granted. The prayer for interim relief is rejected. The appointments made pursuant to the impugned Rules shall remain subject to the disposal of the appeals. Tag with Civil Appeal No. 7906 of 2010 arising from S.L.P. © No. 24321 of 2010. ” It is submitted that proforma respondent Nos. 10 and 11 in Civil Appeal No. 6096/2012, Respondent 6 and 9 in C.A. No. 6097/2012, Respondent No. 4 in C.A. No. 6099/2012 and Respondent Nos. 4,7,10 and 11 in C.A. No. 6103/2012 could not be served through the High Court . Therefore, counsel for the appellant has on 07.02.2017 filed application for dispensing with the service of above said proforma Respondents. Applications are registered as I.A No. 1923 (Copy of the same is placed with appeal paper books. The Applications in the matters abovementioned are listed before the Hon'ble Judgeinchamber with this Office Report. Dated this the 15 th day of February, 2017. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to: 1. Mr. Ajay Choudhary, Adv 219, Lawyers Chambers, S.C.I., N.D. 2. Mr. Rajiv Shankar Dvivedi, Adv. 237, M.C. Setalvad Block, S.C.I., N.D.

3. Mr. Milind Kumar, Adv. 29, Lawyers Chambers, S.C.I., N.D. 4 . Mr. Mukul Kumar, Adv. Supreme Court Bar Library, S.C.I., N.D. A SSISTANT REGISTRAR

ITEM NO.13 IN COURT NO.13 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSI.A. 12-23/2017 in Civil Appeal No(s). 6096-6104/2012GAJENDRA GAUR & ORS.ETC.ETC. Appellant(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)(for dispensing service of notice of lodgment on respondent/petitioner and office report)Date : 03/04/2017 These applications were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD [IN CHAMBERS]For Appellant(s) Mr. Ajay Choudhary, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Milind Kumar, Adv. Mr. Mukul Kumar, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RThe petitioners sought the deletion of proforma respondentnos. 10 and 11 in Civil Appeal No. 6096 of 2012, proformarespondent nos. 6 and 9 in Civil Appeal No. 6097 of 2012,proforma respondent no. 4 in Civil Appeal No. 6099 of 2012 andproforma respondent nos. 4,7,10 and 11 in Civil Appeal No. 6103of 2012.It is stated that these respondents were co-petitionersbefore the High Court and hence their presence is no longernecessary.The applications for deletion are, accordingly, allowedsubject to all just exceptions. (LAYA RAWAT) (SHAKTI P. SHARMA ) SR.P.A. CO URT MASTER

ITEM NO.4 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 MR. M V RAMESH Civil Appeal No(s). 6096-6104/2012 GAJENDRA GAUR & ORS.ETC.ETC. Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (with office report) Date : 10/02/2017 These appeals were called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Ajay Choudhary,Adv. Mr. Rajiv Shankar Dvivedi,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Milind Kumar,Adv. Mr. Mukul Kumar,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Mr.Ajay Choudhary, Ld.counsel for the appellant has filed an application for dispensing with service of unserved proforma respondent Nos. 6 & 9 in C.A.No.6097/2012, respondent No.4 in C.A.No.6099/2012 & respondent Nos. 4,7, 10 & 11 in C.A.No.6103/2012. The same may be listed before the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers for orders. Issue reminder to the concerned Court for certificate of service in respect of the respondent Nos. 10 & 11 in C.A.No.6096/2012, respondent No.7 in C.A.No.6097/2012 & respondent Nos. 5,9 & 12 in C.A.No.6103/2012. (M V RAMESH) Registrar SB

MATTER FOR: 10.02.2017 COURT NO. R2 ITEM NO. 4 [ SECTIONXV IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 60966104 OF 2012 GAJENDRA GAUR & ORS.ETC.ETC. ...APPELLANTS VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS OFFICE REPORT The matters abovementioned were listed before the Ld. Registrar's court on 06.01.2017, when the following Order was passed: “ Ld. Counsel for the appellants has failed to file the fresh particulars and to take fresh steps for the service of NLPA to the unserved respondent Nos. 6 and 9 in C.A. No. 6097/2012, Respondent No. 4 in C.A. No. 6099/2012 and Respondent Nos. 4, 7, 10 and 11 in C.A. No. 6103/2012 despite opportunities. Viewed in that context, the matter shall be processed for listing before the Hon'ble Judge in chambers for further directions. Await orders. List thereafter. Await certificate of service of respondent Nos. 10 and 11 in C.A. No. 6096/2012, Respondent No. 7 in C.A. No. 6097/2012 and Respondent Nos. 5,9 and 12 in C.A. No. 6103/2012 from the concerned court. List again on 10.2.2017. ” It is submitted that Mr. Ajay Choudhary, counsel for the appellant has on 31.01.2017 filed an application for dispensing with service of unserved proforma respondent nos. 6 and 9 in C.A. No. 6097/2012, Respondent No. 4 in C.A. No. 6099/2012 and Respondent Nos. 4, 7, 10 and 11 in C.A. No. 6103/2012, which is under process and to be listed before chamber judge. The matters abovementioned are listed before the Ld. Registrar's Court with this Office Report. Dated this the 9 th day of February, 2017. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to: 1. Mr. Ajay Choudhary, Adv 219, Lawyers Chambers, S.C.I., N.D. 2. Mr. Rajiv Shankar Dvivedi, Adv. 237, M.C. Setalvad Block, S.C.I., N.D. 3. Mr. Milind Kumar, Adv. 29, Lawyers Chambers, S.C.I., N.D. 4 . Mr. Mukul Kumar, Adv. Supreme Court Bar Library, S.C.I., N.D. A SSISTANT REGISTRAR

&ITEM NO.4 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 MR. M V RAMESHCivil Appeal No(s). 6096-6104/2012GAJENDRA GAUR & ORS.ETC.ETC. Appellant(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)(with office report)Date : 10/02/2017 These appeals were called on for hearing today.For Appellant(s) Mr. Ajay Choudhary,Adv. Mr. Rajiv Shankar Dvivedi,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Milind Kumar,Adv. Mr. Mukul Kumar,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RMr.Ajay Choudhary, Ld.counsel for the appellant has filed anapplication for dispensing with service of unserved proformarespondent Nos. 6 & 9 in C.A.No.6097/2012, respondent No.4 inC.A.No.6099/2012 & respondent Nos. 4,7, 10 & 11 inC.A.No.6103/2012. The same may be listed before the Hon'ble Judgein Chambers for orders.Issue reminder to the concerned Court for certificate ofservice in respect of the respondent Nos. 10 & 11 inC.A.No.6096/2012, respondent No.7 in C.A.No.6097/2012 & respondentNos. 5,9 & 12 in C.A.No.6103/2012. (M V RAMESH) RegistrarSB

ITEM NO.68 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 MR. M V RAMESH Civil Appeal No(s). 8302/2010 DEVI PRASAD & ORS. Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (with office report) Date : 24/01/2017 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. P. K. Jain,Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Ruchi Kohli,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Service is complete. Ld.counsel for the parties have not filed the statement of case. However, statement of case is not mandatory as per amended Supreme Court Rules,2013. Viewed thus, the matter shall be processed for listing before the Hon'ble Court as per rules. (M V RAMESH) Registrar SB

MATTER FOR: 24.01.2017 COURT NO. R2 ITEM NO. 68 SECTION XV THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICATION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 8302/2010 DEVI PRASAD & ORS. ...APPELLANTS VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS OFFICE REPORT FOR PREFINAL HEARING MATTER The matter abovementioned was listed before the Hon'ble Court on 20.09.2010, when the Court was pleased to pass the following Order: “Learned counsel for the petitioners says that names of respondent nos. 5 to 10 be deleted from the array of parties. The request of the learned counsel is accepted and the names of respondent Nos. 5 to 10 are deleted from the array of parties subject fo just exception. Delay condoned. Leave granted. The prayer for interim relief is rejected. The appointments made pursuant to the impugned Rules shall remain subject to disposal of the appeal. Tag with C.A. No. 7906 of 2010 (arising out of SLP(C) No. 24321/2010.” It is submitted that earlier there were 10 respondents in the matter abovementioned. Respondent Nos. 5 to 10 have been deleted from the array of parties vide Court's order dated 20.09.2010. Respondent No. 1 is represented through Ms. Ruchi Kohli, Advocate and her name has been updated in the Computer. The concerned High Court has sent Certificate of Service in respect of respondent Nos. 2 to 4, but no one has entered appearance on their behalf so far. Service is complete. Statement of Case has not been filed by either of the parties so far. ..2..

..2.. The matter abovementioned is listed before the Ld. Registrar's Court with this Office Report for PreFinal Hearing Matter. Dated this the 23 rd day of January, 2017. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to: 1. Mr. P. K. Jain, Adv. 418, New Lawyers Chambers, S.C.I. 2. Ms. Ruchi Kohli, Adv. 69, Old Lawyer Chambers, S.C.I. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

|ITEM NO.68 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 MR. M V RAMESHCivil Appeal No(s). 8302/2010DEVI PRASAD & ORS. Appellant(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)(with office report)Date : 24/01/2017 This appeal was called on for hearing today.For Appellant(s) Mr. P. K. Jain,Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Ruchi Kohli,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RService is complete. Ld.counsel for the parties have not filedthe statement of case. However, statement of case is not mandatoryas per amended Supreme Court Rules,2013. Viewed thus, the mattershall be processed for listing before the Hon'ble Court as perrules. (M V RAMESH) RegistrarSB

ITEM NO.22 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 MR. PAWAN DEV KOTWAL Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 34742/2013 KUMARI SARITA AND ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (with interim relief and office report) Date : 19/01/2017 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Praveen Swarup,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Despite last opportunity having been granted, fresh steps for effecting service on respondent nos. 1,2,4,10 and 11 have not been taken, as such, let the matter be placed before the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers for further directions. (PAWAN DEV KOTWAL) Registrar

MATTER FOR 19.01.2017 COURT NO.R1 ITEM NO.22 SECTION XV IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PETITIONS FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL (CIVIL) NO. 34742/2013 WITH PRAYER FOR INTERIM RELIEF SARVA SHRAMIK SANGHATANA ...PETITIONER VERSUS M/S. INTERIM INTERNATIONAL REMOVALS DIVISION OF FREIGHT SYSTEMS (INDIA) PVT. LTD. ...RESPONDENTS OFFICE REPOR T The matter abovementioned was listed before the Ld. Registrar Court on 01.12.2016, when he was pleased to pass the following order: “Last opportunity is granted to learned counsel for the petitioners to take fresh steps for effecting service of notice on respondent No. 1, 2, 4, 10 and 11 within two weeks' time and notice thereafter be issued. None appears for respondent Nos. 3 and 5 to 9 despite due service. List again on 19.01.2017 .” It is submitted that there are 11 respondents in this matter. The Advocate for the petitioner has not taken fresh steps for service on respondent Nos. 1, 2, 4, 10 and 11. So, notice could not be issued. Service on respondent Nos. 3 and 59 is complete through District Court, but none has entered appearance on their behalf. Service is Incomplete on respondent Nos. 1, 2, 4, 10 and 11. The matter abovementioned is listed before the Ld. Registrar Court with this office report. Dated this the 17 th day of January, 2017. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to: 1. Mr. Praveen Sharma , Adv. 2. Mr. Ajay Choudhary, Adv. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 3/KS/OR

jITEM NO.22 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 MR. PAWAN DEV KOTWAL Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 34742/2013KUMARI SARITA AND ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)(with interim relief and office report)Date : 19/01/2017 This petition was called on for hearing today.For Petitioner(s) Mr. Praveen Swarup,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RDespite last opportunity having been granted, freshsteps for effecting service on respondent nos. 1,2,4,10 and11 have not been taken, as such, let the matter be placedbefore the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers for further directions. (PAWAN DEV KOTWAL) Registrar

ITEM NO.96 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 MR. M V RAMESH Civil Appeal No(s). 1668/2012 MAHESH CHAND SAINI Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (with office report) Date : 09/01/2017 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. D.K.Thakur,Adv. Mr. Devendra Jha,Adv. Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Nidhi Jaswal,Adv. Ms. Ruchi Kohli,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Ld. Counsel for the parties have failed to file the statement of case within the statutory period. However, s ervice is complete. Filing of Statement of Case is not mandatory as per amended Supreme Court Rules, 2013. Viewed thus, the matter shall be processed for listing before the Hon'ble Court on its own turn. (M V RAMESH) Registrar MG

MATTER FOR: 09.01.2017 Court R 2 ITEM NO.96 SECTIONXV IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1668 OF 2012 MAHESH CHAND SAINI ...APPELLANT VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS OFFICE REPORT FOR PREFINAL HEARING MATTER The matter abovementioned was listed before the Hon'ble Court on 06.02.2012, when the court was pleased to pass the following order: “ Delay condoned. Leave granted. The prayer for interim relief is rejected. The appointments made pursuant to the impugned Rules shall remain subject to disposal of the appeal. Tag with Civil Appeal No. 7906 of 2010.” It is submitted that there are 12 respondents in this appeal. Respondent Nos. 13 are represented through Ms. Ruchi Kohli Adv. Respondent Nos. 15 & 712 are served through High Court but no one has entered appearance so far. Respondent No. 6 has been deleted vide Court's Order dated 03.10.2016. Service is complete. Counsel for both the parties have not filed statement of case despite Notice dated 06.10.2016 and and as per SCR 2013 the time for filing statement of case has been expired. The matter abovementioned is listed before the Ld. Registrar's Court with this Office Report for prefinal hearing matter. Dated this the 7 th day of January, 2017. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to : 1. Mr. Debasis Misra, Adv. Ch. No. 80, Supreme Court of India 2. Ms. Ruchi Kohli, Adv. 69, Lawyers Chamber, SCI, New Delhi110001 ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

2ITEM NO.96 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 MR. M V RAMESHCivil Appeal No(s). 1668/2012MAHESH CHAND SAINI Appellant(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)(with office report)Date : 09/01/2017 This appeal was called on for hearing today.For Appellant(s) Mr. D.K.Thakur,Adv. Mr. Devendra Jha,Adv. Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Nidhi Jaswal,Adv. Ms. Ruchi Kohli,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RLd. Counsel for the parties have failed to file the statementof case within the statutory period. However, s ervice is complete.Filing of Statement of Case is not mandatory as per amended SupremeCourt Rules, 2013. Viewed thus, the matter shall be processed forlisting before the Hon'ble Court on its own turn. (M V RAMESH) RegistrarMG

Item No.4 1 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 MR. M V RAMESH Civil Appeal No(s). 6096-6104/2012 GAJENDRA GAUR & ORS.ETC.ETC. Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (with office report) Date : 06/01/2017 These appeals were called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Ankit Kothari,Adv. Mr. Ajay Choudhary,Adv. Mr. Rajiv Shankar Dvivedi,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Milind Kumar,Adv. Mr. Mukul Kumar,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Ld. Counsel for the appellants has failed to file the fresh particulars and to take fresh steps for the service of NLPA to the unserved respondent Nos. 6 and 9 in C.A. No. 6097/2012, Respondent No.4 in C.A. No. 6099/2012 and Respondent Nos. 4, 7,10 and 11 in C.A. No. 6103/2012 despite opportunities. Viewed in that context, the matter shall be processed for listing before the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers for further directions. Await orders. List thereafter.

Item No.4 2 Await certificate of service of respondent Nos. 10 and 11 in C.A. No. 6096/2012, Respondent No. 7 in C.A. No. 6097/2012 and Respondent Nos. 5,9 and 12 in C.A. No. 6103/2012 from the concerned court. List again on 10.2.2017 . (M V RAMESH) Registrar MG

MATTER FOR: 06.01.2017 COURT NO. R2 ITEM NO. 4 [ SECTIONXV IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 60966104 OF 2012 GAJENDRA GAUR & ORS.ETC.ETC. ...APPELLANTS VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS OFFICE REPORT The matter abovementioned was listed before the Ld. Registrar's court on 22.11.2016, when the following Order was passed: “ ..C.A. No. 60966104/2012 Four weeks time as last chance is given to the Ld. Counsel for the appellant to comply with the terms of the order dated 21.10.2016 of this Court in respect of the respondent Nos. 6 & 9 in C.A. No. 6097/2012, respondent No. 4 in C.A. No. 6099/12 and respondent Nos. 4,7,10 & 11 in C.A. No. 6103/12. The office report is that the certificate of service of notice in respect of the respondent Nos. 10 & 11 in C.A. No. 6096/12 and respondent No. 7 in C.A. No. 697/2012 and respondent Nos. 5, 9 & 12 in C.A. No. 6103/2012 has not been received as yet. A reminder shall be issued. List the matter again on 06.01.2017.” It is submitted that counsel for the appellant has neither furnished the fresh address of unserved respondent Nos. 6 & 9 in C.A. No. 6097/2012. Respondent No. 4 in C.A. 6099/2012 and respondent Nos. 4,7, 10 & 11 in C.A. No. 6103/2012, nor filed fresh copies of the petitions. Therefore, fresh NLPA could not be issued to the said unserved respondents. It is further submitted that Certificate of service is still awaited from the High Court in respect of respondent Nos. 10 & 11 in C.A. No. 6096/2012, Respondent Nos. 7 in C.A. 6097/2012 and respondent Nos. 5, 9 & 12 in 6103/2012 despite Reminder dated 25.10.2016. Service is incomplete. The matters abovementioned are listed before the Ld. Registrar's Court with this Office Report. Dated this the 4 th day of January, 2017. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

..2.. Copy to: 1. Mr. Ajay Choudhary, Adv 219, Lawyers Chambers, S.C.I., N.D. 2. Mr. Rajiv Shankar Dvivedi, Adv. 237, M.C. Setalvad Block, S.C.I., N.D. 3. Mr. Milind Kumar, Adv. 29, Lawyers Chambers, S.C.I., N.D. 4 . Mr. Mukul Kumar, Adv. Supreme Court Bar Library, S.C.I., N.D. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

rItem No.4 1 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 MR. M V RAMESHCivil Appeal No(s). 6096-6104/2012GAJENDRA GAUR & ORS.ETC.ETC. Appellant(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)(with office report)Date : 06/01/2017 These appeals were called on for hearing today.For Appellant(s) Mr. Ankit Kothari,Adv. Mr. Ajay Choudhary,Adv. Mr. Rajiv Shankar Dvivedi,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Milind Kumar,Adv. Mr. Mukul Kumar,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RLd. Counsel for the appellants has failed to file the freshparticulars and to take fresh steps for the service of NLPA to theunserved respondent Nos. 6 and 9 in C.A. No. 6097/2012, RespondentNo.4 in C.A. No. 6099/2012 and Respondent Nos. 4, 7,10 and 11 inC.A. No. 6103/2012 despite opportunities. Viewed in that context,the matter shall be processed for listing before the Hon'ble Judgein Chambers for further directions. Await orders. List thereafter.Item No.4 2Await certificate of service of respondent Nos. 10 and 11 inC.A. No. 6096/2012, Respondent No. 7 in C.A. No. 6097/2012 andRespondent Nos. 5,9 and 12 in C.A. No. 6103/2012 from the concernedcourt.List again on 10.2.2017 . (M V RAMESH) RegistrarMG

ITEM NO.9 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 MR. PAWAN DEV KOTWAL Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 34742/2013 KUMARI SARITA AND ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (With interim relief and office report) Date : 01/12/2016 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arun M., Adv. Mr. Praveen Swarup,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Last opportunity is granted to learned counsel for the petitioners to take fresh steps for effecting service of notice on respondent no. 1, 2, 4, 10 and 11 within two weeks' time and notice thereafter be issued. None appears for respondent nos. 3 and 5 to 9 despite due service. List again on 19.01.2017. (PAWAN DEV KOTWAL) Registrar

MATTER FOR: 01.12.2016 COURT NO. R1 ITEM NO.9 SECTION XV IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL (CIVIL) NOS. 34742/2013 WITH PRAYER FOR INTERIM RELIEF KUMARI SARITA AND ORS. ...PETITIONERS VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS OFFICE REPOR T The matter abovementioned was listed before the Ld. Registrar Court on 29.09.2016, when the Court was pleased to pass the following order: “ Ld. Counsel for the petitioner to take fresh steps to effect service on respondent no. 1 within two weeks time. Notice thereafter be issued through the standing counsel. None appears for respondent nos. 3 and 5 to 9 despite due service Ld. Counsel for the petitioner to take fresh steps to effect service on respondent nos. 2,4,10 and 11 within two weeks time as last opportunity. Notices thereafter be issued. List again on 01.12.2016.” It is submitted that there are 11 respondent in this matter. The advocate for the petitioner has not taken fresh steps for service on Respondent No. 1,2,4,10 and 11, so notice could not be issued. Service on Respondent Nos. 3 and 59 is complete through District Court, but none has entered appearance on their behalf. Service is incomplete on respondent Nos. 1,2,4,10 and 11. The matter abovementioned is listed before the Ld. Registrar Court with this office report. Dated this the 29 th day of November, 2016. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to: 1. Mr. Praveen Swarup, Adv. 2. Mr. Ajay Choudhary, Adv. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 3/KS/OR

(ITEM NO.9 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 MR. PAWAN DEV KOTWALPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 34742/2013KUMARI SARITA AND ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)(With interim relief and office report)Date : 01/12/2016 This petition was called on for hearing today.For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arun M., Adv. Mr. Praveen Swarup,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RLast opportunity is granted to learned counsel for thepetitioners to take fresh steps for effecting service of notice onrespondent no. 1, 2, 4, 10 and 11 within two weeks' time and noticethereafter be issued. None appears for respondent nos. 3 and 5 to 9 despite dueservice. List again on 19.01.2017. (PAWAN DEV KOTWAL) Registrar

ITEM NO.3 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 MR. M V RAMESH Civil Appeal No(s). 11332/2011 SURAJ MAL JAT & ANR. Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (with office report) WITH C.A. No. 4559/2012 C.A. No. 6096-6104/2012 (With Office Report) Date : 22/11/2016 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv. Mr.T.Gopal,Adv. Ms. Aishwarya Bhati,Adv. Mr. Rajiv Shankar Dvivedi,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Milind Kumar,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Civil Appeal No. 11332/2011 & 4559/2012 The office report is that these matters have already been directed to be listed before the Hon'ble Court. Hence, no further order is required to be passed in them. C.A. No. 6096-6104/2012 Four weeks time as last chance is given to the Ld.counsel for the appellant to comply with the terms of the order dated 21.10.2016 of this Court in respect of the respondent Nos.6 & 9 in …......2

ITEM NO.3 -2- AC6096-6104/2012 C.A.No.6097/2012, respondent No.4 in C.A.No.6099/12 and respondent Nos.4,7,10 & 11 in C.A.No.6103/12. The office report is that the certificate of service of notice in respect of the respondent Nos.10 & 11 in C.A.No.6096/12 and respondent No.7 in C.A.No.6097/2012 and respondent Nos. 5, 9 & 12 in C.A.No.6103/2012 has not been received as yet. A reminder shall be issued. List the matter again on 06.01.2017. (M V RAMESH) Registrar SB

MATTER FOR: 22.11.2016 COURT NO. R2 ITEM NO.3 [ SECTIONXV IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEA L NO. 11332 OF 2011 WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4559 OF 2012 AND CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 60966104 OF 2012 SURAJ MAL JAT & ANR. ETC. ETC. ...APPELLANTS VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. ETC. ...RESPONDENTS OFFICE REPORT The matters abovementioned were listed before the Ld. Registrar's court on 21.10.2016, when the following Order was passed: “ Civil Appeal No. 11332/2011 Ld. counsel for the appellant has already filed the statement of case. Ld. Counsel for the respondent is given 35 days time to file the same. List the matter before the Hon'ble Court as per rules after expiry of the above period. C.A. No. 4559/2012 Service is complete. Ld. Counsel for the parties have not filed the statement of case. However, statement of case is not mandatory as per amended Supreme Court Rules, 2013. Viewed thus, the matter shall be processed for listing before the Hon'ble Court as per rules. C.A. No. 60966104/2012 The unserved cover containing the notices have been received back from the concerned Court in respect of the respondent No. 9 in C.A. No. 6097/12, respondent No. 4 in C.A. No. 6098, 6099/2012 and respondent Nos. 4, 5, 7, 10 & 11 in C.A. No. 6103/2012 due to incomplete address. Hence, Ld. Counsel for the petitioner shall file the fresh particulars of these respondents within a period of four weeks and he shall also take fresh steps for the service of NLPA to them within the same period. Registry to issue reminder to the High Court for certificate of service in respect of the other unserved respondents. List the matter again on 22.11.2016.” ..2..

..2.. CIVIL APPEAL NO. 11332 OF 2011 It is submitted that Counsel for the Appellant has on 06.10.2016 filed statement of case. All the three respondents have been served through High Court but no one has entered appearance so far. Service is complete. C.A. No. 4559 of 2012 It is submitted that appeal has been updated ready as per order dated 21.10.2016. CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 60966104 OF 2012 It is submitted that counsel for the appellant has neither furnished the fresh address of unserved respondent Nos. 6 & 9 in C.A. No. 6097/2012. Respondent No. 4 in C.A. 6099/2012 and respondent Nos. 4,7, 10 & 11 in C.A. No. 6103/2012, nor filed fresh copies of the petitions. Therefore, fresh NLPA could not be issued to the said unserved respondents. It is further submitted that Certificate of service is still awaited from the High Court in respect of respondent Nos. 10 & 11 in C.A. No. 6096/2012, Respondent Nos. 7 in C.A. 6097/2012 and respondent Nos. 5, 9 & 12 in 6103/2012. Service is incomplete. The matters abovementioned are listed before the Ld. Registrar's Court with this Office Report. Dated this the 19 th day of November, 2016. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to: 1. Mr. Debasis Misra, Adv 207, New Lawyers Chambers, S.C.I., N.D. 2. Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, Adv. 18, Todar Mal Road, Bengali Market, New Delhi01 3. Mr. Milind Kumar, Adv. 29 , Lawyers Chambers, SCI, N.D. 4. Mr. Rajiv Shankar Dvivedi, Adv. 237, M.C. Setalvad Block, S.C.I., N.D. 5. Mr. Milind Kumar, Adv. 29, Lawyers Chambers, S.C.I., N.D. 6 . Mr. Mukul Kumar, Adv. Supreme Court Bar Library, S.C.I., N.D. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

XITEM NO.3 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 MR. M V RAMESHCivil Appeal No(s). 11332/2011SURAJ MAL JAT & ANR. Appellant(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)(with office report)WITHC.A. No. 4559/2012C.A. No. 6096-6104/2012(With Office Report) Date : 22/11/2016 This appeal was called on for hearing today.For Appellant(s) Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv. Mr.T.Gopal,Adv. Ms. Aishwarya Bhati,Adv. Mr. Rajiv Shankar Dvivedi,Adv.For Respondent(s) Mr. Milind Kumar,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RCivil Appeal No. 11332/2011 & 4559/2012The office report is that these matters have already beendirected to be listed before the Hon'ble Court. Hence, no furtherorder is required to be passed in them.C.A. No. 6096-6104/2012Four weeks time as last chance is given to the Ld.counsel forthe appellant to comply with the terms of the order dated21.10.2016 of this Court in respect of the respondent Nos.6 & 9 inâ¬ ¦......2ITEM NO.3 -2- AC6096-6104/2012C.A.No.6097/2012, respondent No.4 in C.A.No.6099/12 and respondentNos.4,7,10 & 11 in C.A.No.6103/12.The office report is that the certificate of service of noticein respect of the respondent Nos.10 & 11 in C.A.No.6096/12 andrespondent No.7 in C.A.No.6097/2012 and respondent Nos. 5, 9 & 12in C.A.No.6103/2012 has not been received as yet. A reminder shallbe issued.List the matter again on 06.01.2017. (M V RAMESH) RegistrarSB

ITEM NO.4 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 MR. M V RAMESH Civil Appeal No(s). 11332/2011 SURAJ MAL JAT & ANR. Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (with office report) WITH C.A. No. 4559/2012 C.A. No. 6096-6104/2012 (With Office Report) Date : 21/10/2016 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Ms.Tanuja Manjari Patra,Adv. Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv. Ms. Aishwarya Bhati,Adv. Mr. Rajiv Shankar Dvivedi,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Milind Kumar,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Civil Appeal No.11332/2011 Ld.counsel for the appellant has already filed the statement of case. Ld.counsel for the respondent is given 35 days time to file the same. List the matter before the Hon'ble Court as per rules after expiry of the above period. C.A. No. 4559/2012 Service is complete. Ld.counsel for the parties have not filed the statement of case. However, statement of case is not mandatory …......2

ITEM NO.4 -2- AC11332/11 as per amended Supreme Court Rules,2013. Viewed thus, the matter shall be processed for listing before the Hon'ble Court as per rules. C.A. No. 6096-6104/2012 The unserved cover containing the notices have been received back from the concerned Court in respect of the respondent No.9 in C.A.No.6097/12, respondent No.4 in C.A.No.6098, 6099/12 and respondent Nos.4,5,7,10, & 11 in C.A.No.6103/2012 due to incomplete address. Hence, Ld.counsel for the petitioner shall file the fresh particulars of these respondents within a period of four weeks and he shall also take fresh steps for the service of NLPA to them within the same period. Registry to issue reminder to the High Court for certificate of service in respect of the other unserved respondents. List the matter again on 22.11.2016. (M V RAMESH) Registrar SB

MATTER FOR: 21.10.2016 COURT NO. R2 ITEM NO.4 [ SECTIONXV IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEA L NO. 11332 OF 2011 WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4559 OF 2012 AND CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 60966104 OF 2012 SURAJ MAL JAT & ANR. ETC. ETC. ...APPELLANTS VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. ETC. ...RESPONDENTS wOFFICE REPORT The matters abovementioned were listed before the Ld. Registrar's court on 21.07.2016, when the following Order was passed: “ Civil Appeal No. 11332/2011 The learned counsel for the appellants shall file the statement of case within a period of 45 days and the learned counsel for the respondents shall file the same within a period of 35 days thereafter. C.A. No. 60966104/2012 Await certificate of service in respect of unserved respondent Nos. 6 to 13 in Civil Appeal No. 6096, Respondent Nos. 9, 12 to 16 in C.A. No. 6097, Respondent Nos. 4 to 7 in C.A. nos. 6098 and 6099, Respondent Nos. 4 in C.A. Nos. 6101 and respondent Nos. 4, 6 to 12 in C.A. No. 6103/2012. The office report indicates that the learned counsel for the appellant has filed an application for Transposition of Respondent No. 15 which is defective. The learned counsel shall within a period of four weeks, as last chance rectify the defects whatever have been found in the said application. List again on 21.10.2016.” CIVIL APPEAL NO. 11332 OF 2011 It is submitted that Counsel for the Appellant has on 06.10.2016 filed statement of case. Service is complete. C.A. No. 4559 of 2012 It is submitted that Counsel for both the parties have not filed statement of case so far and time for filing the 2 /

2 statement of case as per Supreme Court Rules, 2013 has been expired. CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 60966104 OF 2012 CIVIL APPEAL(C)NO. 6096 OF 2012 It is submitted that there are 13 respondents in this matter. Respondent Nos. 15 are represented through Mr. Milind Kumar, Advocate. Respondent Nos. 69 and 1213 are served through High Court but no one has entered appearance so far. Certificate of service is still awaited from the High Court in respect of respondent Nos. 10 to 11. Service is incomplete in respect of respondent Nos. 1011. CIVIL APPEAL(C)NO. 6097 OF 2012 It is submitted that there are 16 respondents in this matter. Respondent Nos. 1 to 8 are represented through Mr. Milind Kumar, Advocate. Respondent Nos. 1214 and 16 have been served through the High Court but no one has entered appearance so far.Respondent No. 15 has been transposed as Appellant No. 2 as per Court's Order dated 2.9.2016. Respondent No. 9 could not be served through the High Court as not residing on the given address. Certificate of service is still awaited from the High Court in respect of respondent Nos.10 and 11. Service is incomplete in respect of respondent Nos. 9 and 1011. CIVIL APPEAL(C)NOS. 6098 & 6099 OF 2012 It is submitted that there are common 7 respondents in both the matters abovementioned. Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 are represented through Mr. Milind Kumar, Advocate. Certificate of service has been received from the High Court in respect of respondent Nos. in r/o of Respondent Nos. 5. Respondent No. 4 could not be served through High Court as not residing on the given address. Certificate of service is still awaited in R/o respondent Nos. Service is incomplete on respondent Nos. 4, 6 and 7. 3/

3 CIVIL APPEAL(C)NO. 6100 OF 2012 It is submitted that there are 3 respondents in this matter. Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 are represented through Mr. Milind Kumar, Advocate. Service is complete. CIVIL APPEAL(C)NO. 6101 OF 2012 It is submitted that there are 4 respondents in this matter. Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 are represented through Mr. Milind Kumar, Advocate. Certificate of service has been received from the High Court in respect of respondent No. 4. Service is complete. CIVIL APPEAL(C)NO. 6102 OF 2012 It is submitted that there are 4 respondents in this matter. Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 are represented through Mr. Milind Kumar, Advocate. Service is complete. CIVIL APPEAL(C)NO. 6103 OF 2012 I t is submitted that there are 12 respondents in this matter. Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 are represented through Mr. Milind Kumar, Advocate. Respondent Nos. 6 and 12 have been served through the High Court. Unserved Notice has been received back from the High Court in respect of Respondent No.4, 5, 7, 10 & 11 due to incomplete address. Certificate of service is still awaited in respect of respondent No. 89. Service is incomplete on respondent Nos. 4, 5, 79, 10 & 11. CIVIL APPEAL(C)NO. 6104 OF 2012 It is submitted that there are 3 respondents in this matter. Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 are represented through Mr. Milind Kumar, Advocate. Service is complete. 4/

4 The matters abovementioned are listed before the Ld. Registrar's Court with this Office Report. Dated this the 20 th day of October, 2016. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to: 1. Mr. Debasis Misra, Adv 207, New Lawyers Chambers, S.C.I., N.D. 2. Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, Adv. 18, Todar Mal Road, Bengali Market, New Delhi01 3. Mr. Milind Kumar, Adv. 29 , Lawyers Chambers, SCI, N.D. 4. Mr. Rajiv Shankar Dvivedi, Adv. 237, M.C. Setalvad Block, S.C.I., N.D. 5. Mr. Milind Kumar, Adv. 29, Lawyers Chambers, S.C.I., N.D. 6 . Mr. Mukul Kumar, Adv. Supreme Court Bar Library, S.C.I., N.D. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

ÔITEM NO.4 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 MR. M V RAMESHCivil Appeal No(s). 11332/2011SURAJ MAL JAT & ANR. Appellant(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)(with office report)WITHC.A. No. 4559/2012C.A. No. 6096-6104/2012(With Office Report) Date : 21/10/2016 This appeal was called on for hearing today.For Appellant(s) Ms.Tanuja Manjari Patra,Adv. Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv. Ms. Aishwarya Bhati,Adv. Mr. Rajiv Shankar Dvivedi,Adv.For Respondent(s) Mr. Milind Kumar,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RCivil Appeal No.11332/2011Ld.counsel for the appellant has already filed the statementof case. Ld.counsel for the respondent is given 35 days time tofile the same. List the matter before the Hon'ble Court as perrules after expiry of the above period.C.A. No. 4559/2012Service is complete. Ld.counsel for the parties have not filedthe statement of case. However, statement of case is not mandatoryâ¬ ¦......2ITEM NO.4 -2- AC11332/11as per amended Supreme Court Rules,2013. Viewed thus, the mattershall be processed for listing before the Hon'ble Court as perrules.C.A. No. 6096-6104/2012The unserved cover containing the notices have been receivedback from the concerned Court in respect of the respondent No.9 inC.A.No.6097/12, respondent No.4 in C.A.No.6098, 6099/12 andrespondent Nos.4,5,7,10, & 11 in C.A.No.6103/2012 due to incompleteaddress. Hence, Ld.counsel for the petitioner shall file the freshparticulars of these respondents within a period of four weeks andhe shall also take fresh steps for the service of NLPA to themwithin the same period.Registry to issue reminder to the High Court for certificateof service in respect of the other unserved respondents.List the matter again on 22.11.2016. (M V RAMESH) RegistrarSB

ITEM NO.4 COURT NO.12 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. 3/2016 In Civil Appeal No. 1668/2012 MAHESH CHAND SAINI Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (For deletion of the name of respondent No. 6 and office report) Date : 03/10/2016 This application was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK BHUSHAN [IN CHAMBERS] For Appellant(s) Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Nidhi Jaswal, Adv. Ms. Ruchi Kohli,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R This is an application praying for deletion of the name of respondent No. 6 from the array of parties. Prayer made in the application is allowed. The name of respondent No. 6 is deleted from the array of parties at the risk and responsibility of the petitioner. [ Charanjeet Kaur ] [ Indu Pokhriyal ] A.R.-cum-P.S. Court Master

CHAMBER MATTER SECTIONXV IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1668 OF 2012 MAHESH CHAND SAINI ...APPELLANT VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS OFFICE REPORT ON DEFAULT The matter abovementioned was listed before the Ld. Registrar's Court on 11.11.2014, when the following order was passed: “The learned counsel for the appellant shall file the fresh particulars of the respondent No. 6 within a period of three weeks' and he shall also take appropriate steps for the service of notice to him within the same period. The Learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 seeks and is given four weeks' time to file the counter affidavit. List again on 22.1.2015.” It is submitted that counsel for the Appellant has not furnished the fresh address of the unserved respondent No. 6. Therefore, the matter was again listed before Ld. Registrar's Court on 11.02.2015 and lastly on 21.04.2015, when the following Order was passed: “The office report indicates that although by order dated 11.2.2015 of this Court three weeks time, as last chance was given to the learned counsel for the appellant to comply with the terms of the order of this Court dated 11.11.2014 of the Court, yet he has done the needful within the period stipulated in the order. Viewed in that context, the matter shall be listed before the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers for further future directions. Await orders. List thereafter.” It is further submitted that Counsel for the Appellant has neither filed fresh particulars of respondent No. 6 nor taken any steps for service on the unserved respondent No. 6 so far. Hence, t he default of the Advocate is reported to the Hon'ble JudgeinChambers for orders. Dated this the 16 th day of May, 2016. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ..2..

..2.. Copy to : 1. Mr. Debasis Misra, Adv. Ch. No. 80, Supreme Court of India 2. Ms. Ruchi Kohli, Adv. 69, Lawyers Chamber, SCI, New Delhi110001 ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

ITEM NO.4 COURT NO.12 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSI.A. 3/2016 In Civil Appeal No. 1668/2012MAHESH CHAND SAINI Appellant(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)(For deletion of the name of respondent No. 6 and office report)Date : 03/10/2016 This application was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK BHUSHAN [IN CHAMBERS]For Appellant(s) Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Nidhi Jaswal, Adv. Ms. Ruchi Kohli,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RThis is an application praying for deletion ofthe name of respondent No. 6 from the array ofparties.Prayer made in the application is allowed. Thename of respondent No. 6 is deleted from the array ofparties at the risk and responsibility of thepetitioner.[ Charanjeet Kaur ] [ Indu Pokhriyal ] A.R.-cum-P.S. Court Master

ITEM NO.17 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 MR. PAWAN DEV KOTWAL Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 34742/2013 KUMARI SARITA AND ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (with interim relief and office report) Date : 29/09/2016 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr Aum Mangalasserry, Adv. Mr. Praveen Swarup,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Ld. Counsel for the petitioner to take fresh steps to effect service on respondent no.1 within two weeks time. Notice thereafter be issued through the standing counsel. None appears for respondent nos. 3 and 5 to 9 despite due service. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner to take fresh steps to effect service on respondent nos. 2,4,10 and 11 within two weeks time as last opportunity. Notices thereafter be issued. List again on 1.12.2016. (PAWAN DEV KOTWAL) Registrar

MATTER FOR: 29.09.2016 COURT NO. R1 ITEM NO.17 SECTION XV IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL (CIVIL) NOS. 34742/2013 WITH PRAYER FOR INTERIM RELIEF KUMARI SARITA AND ORS. ...PETITIONERS VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS OFFICE REPOR T The matter abovementioned was listed before the Ld. Registrar Court on 28.027.2016, when the Court was pleased to pass the following order: “SLP(C) No. 34742/2013 Fresh steps to be taken by the Ld. Counsel for the petitioner for service of respondent Nos. 2, 4, 10 and 11 within two weeks. Notice thereafter be issued.” It is submitted that notice was issued on 5.2.2015 to respondent No.1 through Mr. Ajay Choudhary, Standing counsel for the State but he has not entered appearance so far. The Advocate for the petitioner has not taken fresh steps for service on respondent Nos. 2, 4, 10 and 11 so far. Service is Incomplete on respondent Nos. 2, 4, 10 and 11. The matter abovementioned is listed before the Ld. Registrar Court with this office report. Dated this the 28 th day of September, 2016. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to: 1. Mr. Praveen Swarup, Adv. 2. Mr. Ajay Choudhary, Adv. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 3/KS/OR

ITEM NO.17 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 MR. PAWAN DEV KOTWALPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 34742/2013KUMARI SARITA AND ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)(with interim relief and office report)Date : 29/09/2016 This petition was called on for hearing today.For Petitioner(s) Mr Aum Mangalasserry, Adv. Mr. Praveen Swarup,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RLd. Counsel for the petitioner to take fresh steps toeffect service on respondent no.1 within two weeks time.Notice thereafter be issued through the standing counsel.None appears for respondent nos. 3 and 5 to 9 despitedue service.Ld. Counsel for the petitioner to take fresh steps toeffect service on respondent nos. 2,4,10 and 11 within twoweeks time as last opportunity. Notices thereafter beissued.List again on 1.12.2016. (PAWAN DEV KOTWAL) Registrar

ITEM NO.6 COURT NO.12 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. Nos.10 & 11 of 2016 in Civil Appeal No.6097/2012 & 6098/2012 @ C.A. Nos.6096-6104/2012 GAJENDRA GAUR & ORS.ETC.ETC. Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (For transposition and amendment of cause title and office report) Date : 02/09/2016 These applications were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.A. BOBDE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK BHUSHAN Counsel for the parties Mr. Ajay Choudhary,Adv. Mr. Rajiv Shankar Dvivedi,Adv. Mr. Milind Kumar,Adv. Mr. Mukul Kumar,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Heard learned counsel appearing for the applicants and perused the record. I.A. No.10/2016 for transposition of Respondent No.15 to Appellant No.2 in C.A. No.6097/2012 and I.A. No.11/2016 for amendment of cause title in C.A. No.6098/2012, are allowed. (Sanjay Kumar-II) (Indu Pokhriyal) Court Master Court Master

MATTER FOR: 22.04.2016 COURT NO. ITEM NO. SECTIONXV IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL (C) NOS. 60966104 OF 2012 GAJENDRA GAUR & ORS. ETC. ETC. ...APPELLANTS VERSUS [ STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS OFFICE REPORT The matter abovementioned was listed before the Ld. Registrar's Court on 09.09.2015, when the following Order was passed: “ Civil Appeal Nos. 6100, 6102 & 6104/2012 In all the matters numbered above, Ld. Counsel for the appellants shall file the statement of case within a period of 45 days and the Ld. Counsel for the respondents shall file the same within a period of 35 days thereafter. In all other matters, await certificate of service in respect of the unserved respondents. List the matter again on 27.11.2015.” It is submitted that counsel for both the parties have not filed statement of case in Civil Appeal Nos. 6100, 6102 & 6104 so far. It is further submitted that certificate of service is still awaited from the High Court in respect of respondent Nos. 6 to 13 in Civil Appeal No. 6096/2012, Respondent No. 9, 12 to 16 in Civil Appeal NO. 6097/2012, common respondent Nos. 4 to 7 in Civil Appeal Nos. 6098 & 6099/12, respondent No. 4 in Civil Appeal No. 6101/2012 and respondent No. 4, 6 to 12 in Civil Appeal No. 6103/2012. It is lastly submitted that Counsel for the Appellant has on 29.09.2015 filed application for transposition of Proforma Respondent No. 15 in Civil Appeal No. 6097/2012 in which he has not Annexed AnnexureI referred in this application. Therefore, application could not be registered as is still pending. ..2..

..2.. The matters abovementioned are listed before the Ld. Registrar's Court with this Office Report. Dated this the 17 th day of March, 2016. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to: 1. Mr. Rajiv Shankar Dvivedi, Adv. 237, M.C. Setalvad Block, S.C.I., N.D. 2. Mr. Milind Kumar, Adv. 29, Lawyers Chambers, S.C.I., N.D. 3. Mr. Mukul Kumar, Adv. Supreme Court Bar Library, S.C.I., N.D. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

úITEM NO.6 COURT NO.12 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSI.A. Nos.10 & 11 of 2016 in Civil Appeal No.6097/2012 & 6098/2012 @ C.A. Nos.6096-6104/2012GAJENDRA GAUR & ORS.ETC.ETC. Appellant(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)(For transposition and amendment of cause title and office report)Date : 02/09/2016 These applications were called on for hearingtoday.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.A. BOBDE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK BHUSHANCounsel for the parties Mr. Ajay Choudhary,Adv. Mr. Rajiv Shankar Dvivedi,Adv. Mr. Milind Kumar,Adv. Mr. Mukul Kumar,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RHeard learned counsel appearing for the applicants and perusedthe record. I.A. No.10/2016 for transposition of Respondent No.15 toAppellant No.2 in C.A. No.6097/2012 and I.A. No.11/2016 foramendment of cause title in C.A. No.6098/2012, are allowed. (Sanjay Kumar-II) (Indu Pokhriyal) Court Master Court Master

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1668 OF 2012 MAHESH CHAND SAINI APPELLANT(S) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) O R D E R Four weeks' time is granted for doing the needful, failing which the appeal shall stand dismissed without further reference to the Court. ........................J. (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) NEW DELHI, AUGUST 17, 201 6

ITEM NO.11 COURT NO.8 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal No(s). 1668/2012 MAHESH CHAND SAINI Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (Office Report on Default) Date : 17/08/2016 This appeal was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL [IN CHAMBER] For Appellant(s) Mr. D.K. Thakur, Adv. Mr. Devendra Jha, Adv. Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Ruchi Kohli,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Four weeks' time is granted for doing the needful, failing which the appeal shall stand dismissed without further reference to the Court. (S. K. RAKHEJA) COURT MASTER (MALA KUMARI SHARMA) COURT MASTER (Signed order is placed on the file)

..2.. Copy to : 1. Mr. Debasis Misra, Adv. Ch. No. 80, Supreme Court of India 2. Ms. Ruchi Kohli, Adv. 69, Lawyers Chamber, SCI, New Delhi110001 ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

ÎIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIACIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTIONCIVIL APPEAL NO. 1668 OF 2012 MAHESH CHAND SAINI APPELLANT(S) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. RESPONDENT(S)O R D E RFour weeks' time is granted for doing theneedful, failing which the appeal shall standdismissed without further reference to the Court.........................J. (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) NEW DELHI, AUGUST 17, 201 6ITEM NO.11 COURT NO.8 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSCivil Appeal No(s). 1668/2012MAHESH CHAND SAINI Appellant(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)(Office Report on Default)Date : 17/08/2016 This appeal was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL [IN CHAMBER]For Appellant(s) Mr. D.K. Thakur, Adv. Mr. Devendra Jha, Adv. Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Ruchi Kohli,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RFour weeks' time is granted for doing theneedful, failing which the appeal shall stand dismissedwithout further reference to the Court.(S. K. RAKHEJA)COURT MASTER (MALA KUMARI SHARMA)COURT MASTER(Signed order is placed on the file)

ITEM NO.21 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 MR. PAWAN DEV KOTWAL Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 34742/2013 KUMARI SARITA AND ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (with interim relief and office report) WITH SLP(C) No.34663/2013 (with office report) Date : 28/07/2016 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sagar Sharma, Adv. Mr. Praveen Swarup,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R SLP(C) No.34742/2013 Fresh steps to be taken by the Ld. Counsel for the petitioner for service of respondent Nos.2, 4, 10 and 11 within two weeks. Notice thereafter be issued. SLP(C) No.34663/2013 All the respondents have already filed counter affidavit. Registry to process the matter for listing before the Hon'ble Court, however, alongwith the connected matters as and when become ready. List again on 29.9.2016. (PAWAN DEV KOTWAL) Registrar

MATTER FOR: 28.07.2016 COURT NO. R1 ITEM NO.21 SECTION XV IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL (CIVIL) NOS. 34742 & 34663/2013 WITH PRAYER FOR INTERIM RELIEF KUMARI SARITA AND ORS. ...PETITIONERS VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS OFFICE REPOR T The matters abovementioned were listed before the Ld. Registrar Court on 24.02.2015, when the Court was pleased to pass the following order: “Respondent No. 1 is common to both the petitions. Notice was served upon respondent No. 1 through standing counsel but vakalatnama has not been filed. In fact, none present today. Service of respondent Nos. 2 to 11 I SLP(C) No.34742/2013 and of respondent Nos. 2 and 3 in SLP(C) No. 34663/2013 is still awaited. List on 15 th April, 2015.” SLP(C) No. 34742/2013 It is submitted that there are total 11 respondents in this matter. In view of order quoted above, service on respondent No. 1 is complete through Standing Counsel of State, but she has not filed vakalatnama. Service on respondent Nos. 3 and 59 is complete through District Court, but none has entered appearance on their behalf. Service on respondent Nos. 2, 4, 10 and 11 is still awaited. Applicants mentioned in I.A. No. 3/2015 have been allowed as Intervenors (Sl Nos. 1238 in Cause Title) vide order dated 13.7.2016 of Hon'ble Judge in Chamber. Service is Incomplete on respondent Nos. 1, 2, 4, 10 and 11. SLP(C) No. 34663/2013 It is submitted that there are 3 respondents in this matter. Ms. Ruchi Kohli, Advocate for all the respondents has filed counter affidavit on their behalf. Service is complete.

The matters abovementioned are listed before the Ld. Registrar Court with this office report. Dated this the 27 th day of July, 2016. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to: 1. Mr. Praveen Swarup, Adv. 2. Ms. Ruchi Kohli, Adv. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 3/KS/OR

\232ITEM NO.21 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 MR. PAWAN DEV KOTWALPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 34742/2013KUMARI SARITA AND ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)(with interim relief and office report)WITHSLP(C) No.34663/2013(with office report)Date : 28/07/2016 This petition was called on for hearing today.For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sagar Sharma, Adv. Mr. Praveen Swarup,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RSLP(C) No.34742/2013Fresh steps to be taken by the Ld. Counsel for thepetitioner for service of respondent Nos.2, 4, 10 and 11within two weeks. Notice thereafter be issued.SLP(C) No.34663/2013All the respondents have already filed counter affidavit.Registry to process the matter for listing before theHon'ble Court, however, alongwith the connected matters asand when become ready.List again on 29.9.2016. (PAWAN DEV KOTWAL) Registrar

Item No.10 2 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R C.A. No. 11332/2011 and C.A. No. 4559/2012 The learned counsel for the appellants shall file the statement of case within a period of 45 days and the learned counsel for the respondents shall file the same within a period of 35 days thereafter. C.A. Nos. 6096-6104/2012 Await certificate of service in respect of unserved respondent Nos. 6 to 13 in Civil Appeal No. 6096, Respondent Nos. 9,12 to 16 in C.A. No. 6097, Respondent Nos. 4 to 7 in C.A. Nos. 6098 and 6099, Respondent No.4 in C.A. No. 6101 and respondent Nos. 4, 6 to 12 in C.A. No. 6103/2012. The office report indicates that the learned counsel for the appellant has filed an application for Transposition of Respondent No.15 which is defective. The learned counsel shall within a period of four weeks, as last chance rectify the defects whatever have been found in the said application. List again on 21.10.2016 . (M V RAMESH) Registrar MG

MATTER FOR: 21.07.2016 COURT NO. R2 ITEM NO. 10 [ SECTIONXV IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEA L NO. 11332 OF 2011 WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4559 OF 2012 AND CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 60966104 OF 2012 SURAJ MAL JAT & ANR. ETC. ETC. ...APPELLANTS VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. ETC. ...RESPONDENTS OFFICE REPORT The matters abovementioned were listed before the Ld. Registrar's court on 28.04.2016, when the following Order was passed: “ Civil Appeal No. 11332/2011 Await certificate of service in respect of the respondent No. 2. C.A. No. 4559/2012 The office report is that the certificate of service of notice in respect of the respondent No. 4 has not been received as yet. A reminder shall be issued.” C.A. No. 60966104/2012 Issue fresh reminder to the concerned Court for certificate of service in respect of the unserved respondents. I.A. for transposition of respondent No. 15 in C.A. No. 6097/12 is defective. Ld. Counsel shall within a period of four weeks cure the defects. List the matters again on 21.07.2016.” CIVIL APPEAL NO. 11332 OF 2011 It is submitted that Certificate of service in respect of respondent No. 2 have been received from the concerned High Court. Service is complete. It is further submitted that statement of case Notice is yet to be issued. ..2..

..2.. CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4559 OF 2012 It is submitted that Respondent No. 4 has been served and represented through Mr. Milind Kumar, Advocate. Service is complete. It is further submitted that statement of case Notice is yet to be issued. CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 60966104 OF 2012 It is submitted that certificate of service has not been received from the High Court in respect of unserved Respondent Nos. 6 to 13 in Civil Appeal No. 6096, respondent Nos. 9, 12 to 16 in C.A. No. 6097, respondent Nos. 4 to 7 in Civil Appeal Nos. 6098 & 6099, respondent No. 4 in Civil Appeal No. 6101 & respondent Nos. 4, 6 to 12 in Civil Appeal No. 6103 despite Reminder dated 05.05.2016. It is further submitted that counsel for the appellant has ot cured the defects in I.A. for Transposition of respondent No. 15 which is still pending. Service is incomplete. The matters abovementioned are listed before the Ld. Registrar's Court with this Office Report. Dated this the 20 th day of July, 2016. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to: 1. Mr. Debasis Misra, Adv 207, New Lawyers Chambers, S.C.I., N.D. 2. Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, Adv. 18, Todar Mal Road, Bengali Market, New Delhi01 3. Mr. Milind Kumar, Adv. 29 , Lawyers Chambers, SCI, N.D. 4. Mr. Rajiv Shankar Dvivedi, Adv. 237, M.C. Setalvad Block, S.C.I., N.D. 5. Mr. Milind Kumar, Adv. 29, Lawyers Chambers, S.C.I., N.D. 6 . Mr. Mukul Kumar, Adv. Supreme Court Bar Library, S.C.I., N.D. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

Item No.10 1 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 MR. M V RAMESH Civil Appeal No(s). 11332/2011 SURAJ MAL JAT & ANR. Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (with office report) WITH C.A. No. 4559/2012 C.A. No. 6096-6104/2012 Office Report) Date : 21/07/2016 These appeals were called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Devendra Jha,Adv. Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv. Ms. Heena Khan,Adv. Ms. Aishwarya Bhati,Adv. Mr. Rajiv Shankar Dvivedi,Adv. Mr. Anikit R. Kothari,Adv. Mr. Ajay Choudhary,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Milind Kumar,Adv. Mr. Mukul Kumar,Adv.Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed byPOOJA SHARMADate: 2016.07.2116:38:52 ISTReason:Item No.10 2 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RC.A. No. 11332/2011 and C.A. No. 4559/2012 The learned counsel for the appellants shall file thestatement of case within a period of 45 days and the learnedcounsel for the respondents shall file the same within a period of35 days thereafter.C.A. Nos. 6096-6104/2012

Await certificate of service in respect of unserved respondentNos. 6 to 13 in Civil Appeal No. 6096, Respondent Nos. 9,12 to 16in C.A. No. 6097, Respondent Nos. 4 to 7 in C.A. Nos. 6098 and6099, Respondent No.4 in C.A. No. 6101 and respondent Nos. 4, 6 to12 in C.A. No. 6103/2012. The office report indicates that the learned counsel for theappellant has filed an application for Transposition of RespondentNo.15 which is defective. The learned counsel shall within a periodof four weeks, as last chance rectify the defects whatever havebeen found in the said application. List again on 21.10.2016. (M V RAMESH) RegistrarMG

ITEM NO.11 COURT NO.11 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. 3/2015 in Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 34742/2013 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 06/08/2012 in DBSA No. 905/2012 passed by the High Court of Rajasthan at Jaipur) KUMARI SARITA AND ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (for impleadment) Date : 13/07/2016 This application was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN [IN CHAMBERS] For Petitioner(s) Mr. Praveen Swarup,Adv. Ms. Sushma Verma, Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Applicants mentioned in para 8 of the application for impleament are allowed to intervene in stead of being impleaded. In view of the above, I.A.No.3/2015 is disposed of. (Rajni Mukhi) (Renu Diwan ) SR. P.A. COURT MASTER

CHAMBER MATTER MATTER FOR: COURT NO. ITEM NO. SECTION XV IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NO. 3/2015 (Application for impleadment) IN PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL (CIVIL) NO. 34742/2013 SARITA AND ORS. ...PETITIONERS VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS OFFICE REPOR T It is submitted that Mr. Praveen Swarup, Advocate has on 24.07.2015 filed an application for impleadment to implead applicants as a respondent along with Annexures and vakalatnama/memo of appearance on behalf of the applicants, which has been registered as I.A. No. 3/2015. Copy of the same is placed with SLP paper books. Service is incomplete in SLP. The application in the matter abovementioned is listed before the Hon'ble JudgeinChamber with this office report. Dated this the 13 th day of May, 2016. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to: 1. Mr. Praveen Swarup, Adv. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 3/KS/OR

\202 ITEM NO.11 COURT NO.11 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. 3/2015 in Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 34742/2013 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 06/08/2012 in DBSA No. 905/2012 passed by the High Court of Rajasthan at Jaipur) KUMARI SARITA AND ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (for impleadment) Date : 13/07/2016 This application was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN [IN CHAMBERS] For Petitioner(s) Mr. Praveen Swarup,Adv. Ms. Sushma Verma, Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Applicants mentioned in para 8 of the application for impleament are allowed to intervene in stead of being impleaded. In view of the above, I.A.No.3/2015 is disposed of. (Rajni Mukhi) (Renu Diwan)Signature Not Verified SR. P.A. COURT MASTERDigitally signed byJAYANT KUMAR ARORADate: 2016.07.1611:13:46 ISTReason:

ITEM NO.5 COURT NO.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 I.A.No.6 of 2016 in Civil Appeal No(s).9618 of 2011 BHANA RAM Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (For early hearing and office report) Date : 11/07/2016 This application was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD For Appellant(s) Ms. Aishwarya Bhati,Adv. Ms. Tanjuja Patra,Adv. Ms. Eshita Kapur,Adv. Mr. Dileep Kr. Dubey,Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Ruchi Kohli,Adv. Ms. Nidhi Jaswal,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Since the hearing of the appeal has already been expedited, we see no reason to call for any further direction. I.A. No.6 of 2016 is accordingly disposed of. (MAHABIR SINGH) (VEENA KHERA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER

MATTER FOR: COURT NO. ITEM NO. SECTION XV THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NO. 6 OF 2016 (Application for early hearing) IN CIVIL APPEAL NO. 9618 OF 2011 BHANA RAM ...APPELLANT VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS OFFICE REPORT The matter abovementioned was listed before the Hon'ble Court on 02.11.2011, when the Court was pleased to pass following order: “Leave granted. The prayer for interim relief is rejected. The appointments made pursuant to the impugned Rules shall remain subject to disposal of the appeal. Tag with Civil Appeal No. 7906 of 2010 arising form S.L.P. (Civil) No. 24321 of 2010.” It is submitted that Counsel for the appellant has on 16.09.2013 filed an application for early hearing registered as I.A. No. 3. The same was listed before the Hon'ble Court on 02.01.2014, when the Court was pleased to pass the following Order: “ I.A. for early hearing is dismissed for the present. Counsel is permitted to renew it in the year 2015.” It is further submitted that pursuant to Order quoted above, Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, Advocate for the Appellant has on 19.04.2016 filed an application for early hearing which is registered as I.A. No. 6/2016. (Copy of the same is placed alongwith appeal paper books). It is lastly submitted that service is complete in connected main matter, i.e. C.A. No. 7906/2010. Service is complete. The application in the matter abovementioned is listed before the Hon'ble Court. Dated this the 17 th day of May, 2016. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

..2.. ..2.. Copy to: 1. Mr. Aishwarya Bhati, Adv. 18, Todar Mal Road, Bengali Market, N.D. 01 2. Ms. Ruchi Kohli, Adv. 69 , Lawyers Chambers, SCI, N.D. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¬ITEM NO.5 COURT NO.1 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSI.A.No.6 of 2016 in Civil Appeal No(s).9618 of 2011BHANA RAM Appellant(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)(For early hearing and office report)Date : 11/07/2016 This application was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUDFor Appellant(s) Ms. Aishwarya Bhati,Adv.Ms. Tanjuja Patra,Adv.Ms. Eshita Kapur,Adv.Mr. Dileep Kr. Dubey,Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Ruchi Kohli,Adv.Ms. Nidhi Jaswal,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RSince the hearing of the appeal has already beenexpedited, we see no reason to call for any further direction.I.A. No.6 of 2016 is accordingly disposed of.(MAHABIR SINGH) (VEENA KHERA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER

ITEM NO.6 COURT NO.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 I.A. 3/2015 in Civil Appeal No(s). 5183/2011 GIRDHARI LAL SHARMA & ORS. Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (for early hearing and office report) Date : 10/05/2016 This application was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT For Appellant(s) Ms. Aishwarya Bhati,Adv. Mr. Jaideep Singh, Adv. MS.Heena Khan, adv. Mr.Dilip Kumar Nayak, Adv. Mr.Anshul Sharma, Adv. MS. Tanuja, Adv. Mr. T.Gopal, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. S.S.Shamshery, AAG, Mr. Amit Sharma, Adv. Mr.Prateek Yadav, Adv. MS.Anu Dixit Kaushik, Adv. Ms. Ruchi Kohli,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Heard. I.A. No. 3 of 2015 (Appln. For early hearing) is allowed. Hearing of the appeal is expedited. (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master

MATTER FOR: COURT NO. ITEM NO. SECTIONXV IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NO. 3 OF 2015 (Application for early hearing) IN CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5183 OF 2011 GIRDHARI LAL SHARMA & ORS. ...APPELLANTS VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS OFFICE REPORT It is submitted that Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, Advocate for the appellants has on 11.12.2015 filed an application for early hearing alongwith Annexure A1 which is registered as I.A. No. 3 of 2015. (Copy of the same is included in the paper books). Service is complete. It is further submitted that Counsel for the appellant has filed statement of case but counsel for the respondents has not filed statement of case so far. The application in the matter abovementioned is listed before the Hon'ble Court with this Office Report. Dated this the 19 th day of December, 2015. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to: 1. Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, Adv. 18, Todar Mal Road, Bengali Market, N.D. 110001 2. Mr. S.K. Singhania, Adv. 34, Lawyers Chambers, SCI, N.D. 2. Mr. Ruchi Kohli, Adv. 69, Lawyers Chambers, SCI, N.D. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

| ITEM NO.6 COURT NO.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 I.A. 3/2015 in Civil Appeal No(s). 5183/2011 GIRDHARI LAL SHARMA & ORS. Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (for early hearing and office report) Date : 10/05/2016 This application was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT For Appellant(s) Ms. Aishwarya Bhati,Adv. Mr. Jaideep Singh, Adv. MS.Heena Khan, adv. Mr.Dilip Kumar Nayak, Adv. Mr.Anshul Sharma, Adv. MS. Tanuja, Adv. Mr. T.Gopal, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. S.S.Shamshery, AAG, Mr. Amit Sharma, Adv. Mr.Prateek Yadav, Adv. MS.Anu Dixit Kaushik, Adv. Ms. Ruchi Kohli,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Heard. I.A. No. 3 of 2015 (Appln. For early hearing) is allowed. Hearing of the appeal is expedited.Signature Not Verified (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera)Digitally signed bySHASHI SAREENDate: 2016.05.13 AR-cum-PS14:41:43 ISTReason: Court Master

ITEM NO.11 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 MR. M V RAMESH Civil Appeal No(s). 11332/2011 SURAJ MAL JAT & ANR. Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (with office report) WITH C.A. No. 4559/2012 C.A. No. 6096-6104/2012 (With Office Report) Date : 28/04/2016 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv. Ms.Anshul Sharma,Adv. Ms. Aishwarya Bhati,Adv. Mr.Ajay Singh,Adv. Mr. Rajiv Shankar Dvivedi,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Milind Kumar,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Civil Appeal No.11332/2011 Await certificate of service in respect of the respondent No.2. C.A. No. 4559/2012 The office report is that the certificate of service of notice in respect of the respondent No.4 has not been received as yet. A reminder shall be issued. … ......2

ITEM NO.11 -2- AC11332/2011 C.A. No. 6096-6104/2012 Issue fresh reminder to the concerned Court for certificate of service in respect of the unserved respondents. I.A. for transposition of respondent No.15 in C.A.No.6097/12 is defective. Ld.counsel shall within a period of four weeks cure the defects. List the matters again on 21.07.2016. (M V RAMESH) Registrar SB

MATTER FOR: 28.04.2016 COURT NO. R2 ITEM NO. 11 SECTIONXV IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEA L NO. 11332 OF 2011 WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4559 OF 2012 AND CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 60966104 OF 2012 SURAJ MAL JAT & ANR. ETC. ETC. ...APPELLANTS VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. ETC. ETC. ...RESPONDENTS OFFICE REPORT CIVIL APPEAL NO. 11332 OF 2011 The matter abovementioned was listed before the Ld. Registrar's court on 10.03.2016, when the following Order was passed: “The office report is that the certificate of service in respect of the respondent No. 2 has not been received from the concerned High Court as yet. A fresh reminder shall be issued. List the matter again on 22.04.2016.” It is submitted that still Certificate of service in respect of respondent No. 2 has not been received from the High Court despite Reminders dated 06.01.2016 and 11.03.2016. Service is incomplete upon respondent No. 2 in Civil Appeal as well as I.A. No. 3. CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4559 OF 2012 The matter abovementioned was listed before the Hon'ble Court on 04.05.2012, when the Court was pleased to pass the following Order: “Delay condoned. Leave granted. Tag with C.A. No. 373 of 2011.” It is submitted that there are four respondents in this matter. Respondent No. 1 is represented through Mr. Milind Kumar, Advocate. Certificate of service has been received from the High Court in respect of respondent Nos. 2 & 3, but no one has entered appearance so far. Certificate of service is still awaited from ..2..

..2.. the High Court in respect of respondent No. 4 despite this Registry's letter dated 29.05.2012 and subsequent reminder dated 06.03.2014. Service is incomplete in respect of Respondent No. 4. CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 60966104 OF 2012 The matters abovementioned were listed before the Ld. Registrar's Court on 09.09.2015, when the following Order was passed: “ Civil Appeal Nos. 6100, 6102 & 6104/2012 In all the matters numbered above, Ld. Counsel for the appellants shall file the statement of case within a period of 45 days and the Ld. Counsel for the respondents shall file the same within a period of 35 days thereafter. In all other matters, await certificate of service in respect of the unserved respondents. List the matter again on 27.11.2015.” It is submitted that counsel for both the parties have not filed statement of case in Civil Appeal Nos. 6100, 6102 & 6104 so far. It is further submitted that certificate of service is still awaited from the High Court in respect of respondent Nos. 6 to 13 in Civil Appeal No. 6096/2012, Respondent No. 9, 12 to 16 in Civil Appeal NO. 6097/2012, common respondent Nos. 4 to 7 in Civil Appeal Nos. 6098 & 6099/12, respondent No. 4 in Civil Appeal No. 6101/2012 and respondent No. 4, 6 to 12 in Civil Appeal No. 6103/2012. It is lastly submitted that Counsel for the Appellant has on 29.09.2015 filed application for transposition of Proforma Respondent No. 15 in Civil Appeal No. 6097/2012 in which he has not Annexed AnnexureI referred in this application. Therefore, application could not be registered as is still pending. The matters abovementioned are listed before the Ld. Registrar's Court with this Office Report. Dated this the 27 th day of April, 2016. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ..3..

..3.. Copy to: 1. Mr. Debasis Misra, Adv 207, New Lawyers Chambers, S.C.I., N.D. 2. Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, Adv. 18, Todar Mal Road, Bengali Market, New Delhi01 3. Mr. Milind Kumar, Adv. 29 , Lawyers Chambers, SCI, N.D. 4. Mr. Rajiv Shankar Dvivedi, Adv. 237, M.C. Setalvad Block, S.C.I., N.D. 5. Mr. Milind Kumar, Adv. 29, Lawyers Chambers, S.C.I., N.D. 6 . Mr. Mukul Kumar, Adv. Supreme Court Bar Library, S.C.I., N.D. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

ITEM NO.11 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 MR. M V RAMESHCivil Appeal No(s). 11332/2011SURAJ MAL JAT & ANR. Appellant(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)(with office report)WITHC.A. No. 4559/2012C.A. No. 6096-6104/2012(With Office Report) Date : 28/04/2016 This appeal was called on for hearing today.For Appellant(s) Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv. Ms.Anshul Sharma,Adv. Ms. Aishwarya Bhati,Adv. Mr.Ajay Singh,Adv. Mr. Rajiv Shankar Dvivedi,Adv.For Respondent(s) Mr. Milind Kumar,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RCivil Appeal No.11332/2011Await certificate of service in respect of the respondentNo.2.C.A. No. 4559/2012The office report is that the certificate of service of noticein respect of the respondent No.4 has not been received as yet. Areminder shall be issued. â¬ ¦ ......2ITEM NO.11 -2- AC11332/2011C.A. No. 6096-6104/2012Issue fresh reminder to the concerned Court for certificate ofservice in respect of the unserved respondents.I.A. for transposition of respondent No.15 in C.A.No.6097/12is defective. Ld.counsel shall within a period of four weeks curethe defects.List the matters again on 21.07.2016. (M V RAMESH) RegistrarSB

ITEM NO.94 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 MR. M V RAMESH Civil Appeal No(s). 8661/2012 PRADEEP KUMAR SHARMA & ORS. Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (with office report) Date : 19/04/2016 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Ruchi Kohli,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Ld.counsel for the parties have failed to file the statement of case within the statutory period. Viewed thus, the matter shall be processed for listing before the Hon'ble Court as per rules. (M V RAMESH) Registrar SB

MATTER FOR: 19.04.2016 Court R ITEM NO. SECTIONXV IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 8661 OF 2012 PRADEEP KUMAR SHARMA & ORS. ...APPELLANTS VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS OFFICE REPORT FOR PREFINAL HEARING MATTER The matter abovementioned was listed before the Hon'ble Court on 30.11.2012, when the Court was pleased to pass the following Order: “Delay condoned. Leave granted. Tag with C.A. No. 7906 of 2010.” It is submitted that are three respondents and are represented through Ms. Ruchi Kohli, Advocate. Service is complete. Counsel for both the parties have not filed statement of case despite this Registry's Notice dated 22.09.2014 and as per Supreme Court Rules, 2013 time for filing statement of case has already been expired. The matter abovementioned is listed before the Ld. Registrar's Court with this Office Report for prefinal hearing matter. Dated this the 18 th day of April, 2016. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to: 1. Mr. Debasis Misra, Adv. Central Agency Section, SCI, N.D. 2. Ms. Ruchi Kohli, Adv. 69, Old Lawyers Chambers, SCI, N.D. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

ITEM NO.97 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 MR. M V RAMESH Civil Appeal No(s). 8215/2013 SURESH CHAND JAIN Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (with office report) Date : 13/04/2016 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. P. K. Jain,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Milind Kumar,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Ld.counsel for the parties have failed to file the statement of case within the statutory period. Viewed thus, the matter shall be processed for listing before the Hon'ble Court as per rules. (M V RAMESH) Registrar SB

ITEM NO.96 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 MR. M V RAMESH Civil Appeal No(s). 10281/2010 SARLA SHARMA Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH C.A. No. 322/2013 C.A. No. 6898/2012 (With Office Report) Date : 13/04/2016 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Ms.Apurva Taran,Adv. Ms. Pratibha Jain,Adv. Mr. Rakesh Dahiya,Adv. Mr. P. K. Jain,Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms.Nidhi Jaswal,Adv. Ms. Ruchi Kohli,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Civil Appeal No(s). 10281/2010 Ld.counsel for the appellant has already filed the statement of case. Ld.counsel for the respondents has failed to file the same within the statutory period. Viewed thus, the matter shall be processed for listing before the Hon'ble Court as per rules. C.A. No.322/2013 Ld.counsel for the parties have failed to file the statement of case within the statutory period. Viewed thus, the matter shall be processed for listing before the Hon'ble Court as per rules. … ........2

ITEM NO.96 -2- SC10281/2010 C.A. No.6898/2012 Ld.counsel for the appellant has failed to file the statement of case within the statutory period. Service of notice is complete on the respondent, but no one has entered appearance on his behalf. Viewed thus, the matter shall be processed for listing before the Hon'ble Court as per rules. (M V RAMESH) Registrar SB

MATTER FOR: 13.04.2016 Court R2 ITEM NO. 97 SECTIONXV IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 8215 OF 2013 SURESH CHAND JAIN ...APPELLANT VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS OFFICE REPORT FOR PREFINAL HEARING MATTER The matter abovementioned was listed before the Hon'ble Court on 09.09.2013, when the Court was pleased to pass the following Order: “ Delay condoned. Leave granted.” It is submitted that there are five respondents in thi s appeal and are represented through Mr. Milind Kumar, Advocate. Service is complete. It is submitted that both the parties have not filed statement of case despite this Registry's Notice dated 02.12.2015 and as per Supreme Court Rules, 2013 time for filing statement of case has already been expired. The matter abovementioned is listed before the Ld. Registrar's Court with this Office Report for prefinal hearing matter. Dated this the 12 th day of April, 2016. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to: 1. Mr. P.K. Jain, Adv. 418, New Lawyers Chambers, SCI, N.D. 2. Mr. Milind Kumar, Adv. 29, Lawyers Chambers, SCI, N.D. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

MATTER FOR: 13.04.2016 COURT NO. R2 ITEM NO. 96 SECTIONXV IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL (C) NO. 10281 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPEAL (C) NO. 322 OF 2013 WITH CIVIL APPEAL (C) NO. 6898 OF 2012 SARLA SHARMA ETC. ETC. ...APPELLANTS VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS OFFICE REPORT FOR PREFINAL HEARING MATTER CIVIL APPEAL (C) NO. 10281 OF 2010 It is submitted that leave was granted by Hon'ble Court on 03.12.2010. There are three respondents in this matter and all are represented through Ms. Ruchi Kohli, Advocate. Service is complete. Statement of case has been filed by Counsel for Appellant but the same has not been filed by Counsel for respondents. CIVIL APPEAL (C) NO. 322 OF 2013 It is submitted that leave was granted by Hon'ble Court on 03.01.2013. T here are 27 respondents in this appeal. Ms. Ruchi Kohli, Advocate is appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 & 2. Certificate of service has been received in respect of respondent Nos. 327 but no one has entered appearance so far. Respondent No. 27 has been transposed as Appellant as per Court's Order dated 16.01.2015. Service is complete. It is submitted that Counsel for both the parties have not filed statement of case despite this Registry's Notice dated 19.11.2014 and as per Supreme Court Rules, 2013 time for filing statement of case has already been expired. CIVIL APPEAL (C) NO. 6898 OF 2012 It is submitted that leave was granted by Hon'ble Court on 21.09.2012. T here are four respondents in this matter. Certificate ..2..

..2.. of service has been received from the High Court in respect of all the four respondents but no one has entered appearance so far. However, it may be mentioned that Ms. Ruchi Kohli, Advocate is appearing on behalf of State of Rajasthan is connected matter. Service is complete. Counsel for the appellant has not filed statement of case despite this Registry's Notice dated 19.09.2014 and as per Supreme Court Rules, 2013 time for filing statement of case has already been expired. The matters abovementioned are listed before the Ld. Registrar's Court with this Office Report for prefinal hearing matter. Dated this the 12 th day of April, 2016. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to: 1. Ms. Pratibha Jain, Adv. 34, Lawyers Chambers, SCI, N.D. 2. Mr. Rakesh Dahiya, Adv. 18, New Lawyers Chambers, SCI, N.D. 3 . Ms. Ruchi Kohli, Adv. 69 , Old Lawyers Chambers, SCI, N.D. 4. Mr. P.K. Jain, Adv. 418, New Lawyers Chambers, SCI, N.D. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

ÈITEM NO.97 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 MR. M V RAMESHCivil Appeal No(s). 8215/2013SURESH CHAND JAIN Appellant(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)(with office report)Date : 13/04/2016 This appeal was called on for hearing today.For Appellant(s) Mr. P. K. Jain,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Milind Kumar,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RLd.counsel for the parties have failed to file the statementof case within the statutory period. Viewed thus, the matter shallbe processed for listing before the Hon'ble Court as per rules. (M V RAMESH) RegistrarSB

ITEM NO.3 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 MR. M V RAMESH Civil Appeal No(s). 5258/2011 RAJENDRA KUMAR SAIN Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 07/04/2016 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Ms. Pratibha Jain,Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Nidhi Jaswal,Adv. Ms. Ruchi Kohli,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The office report indicates that the Ld. Counsel for parties have failed to file the statement of case within the statutory period. Viewed thus, the matter shall be processed for listing before the Hon'ble Court under the rules. (M V RAMESH) Registrar MG

MATTER FOR: 07.04.2016 Court R2 ITEM NO. 3 SECTIONXV IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5258 OF 2011 RAJENDRA KUMAR SAIN ...APPELLANT VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS OFFICE REPORT FOR PREFINAL HEARING MATTER It is submitted that there are four respondents in this appeal. Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 are represented through Ms. Ruchi Kohli, Advocate and respondent No. 4 has been served through Certificate of service but no one has entered appearance so far. Service is complete. It is further submitted that Counsel for the Appellant and Counsel for the Respondent have not filed their respective statement of case so far. The matter abovementioned is listed before the Ld. Registrar's Court with this Office Report for prefinal hearing matter. Dated this the 6 th day of April, 2016. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to: 1. Ms. Pratibha Jain, Adv. 34, Lawyers Chambers, SCI, N.D. 2. Ms. Ruchi Kohli, Adv. 69, Lawyers Chambers, SCI, N.D. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

\206ITEM NO.3 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 MR. M V RAMESHCivil Appeal No(s). 5258/2011RAJENDRA KUMAR SAIN Appellant(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)Date : 07/04/2016 This appeal was called on for hearing today.For Appellant(s) Ms. Pratibha Jain,Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Nidhi Jaswal,Adv. Ms. Ruchi Kohli,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RThe office report indicates that the Ld. Counsel for partieshave failed to file the statement of case within the statutoryperiod. Viewed thus, the matter shall be processed for listingbefore the Hon'ble Court under the rules. (M V RAMESH) RegistrarMG

ITEM NO.15 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 MR. M V RAMESH Civil Appeal No(s). 11332/2011 SURAJ MAL JAT & ANR. Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (with office report) Date : 10/03/2016 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The office report is that the certificate of service in respect of the respondent No.2 has not been received from the concerned High Court as yet. A fresh reminder shall be issued. List the matter again on 22.04.2016. (M V RAMESH) Registrar SB

MATTER FOR: 10.03.2016 COURT NO. R2 ITEM NO. 15 SECTIONXV IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 11332 OF 2011 SURAJ MAL JAT & ANR. ...APPELLANTS VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS OFFICE REPORT The matter abovementioned was listed before the Ld. Registrar's court on 27.01.2016, when the following Order was passed: “Await certificate of service in respect of the respondent No. 2 from the concerned High Court. List the matter again on 10.03.2016.” It is submitted that still Certificate of service in respect of respondent No. 2 has not been received from the High Court despite Reminder dated 06.01.2016. Service is incomplete upon respondent No. 2 in Civil Appeal as well as I.A. No. 3 . The matter abovementioned is listed before the Ld. Registrar's Court with this Office Report. Dated this the 9 th day of March, 2016. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to: Mr. Debasis Misra, Adv 207, New Lawyers Chambers, S.C.I., N.D. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

" ITEM NO.15 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 MR. M V RAMESH Civil Appeal No(s). 11332/2011 SURAJ MAL JAT & ANR. Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (with office report) Date : 10/03/2016 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The office report is that the certificate of service in respect of the respondent No.2 has not been received from the concerned High Court as yet. A fresh reminder shall be issued. List the matter again on 22.04.2016. (M V RAMESH) Registrar SBSignature Not VerifiedDigitally signed bySushma Kumari BajajDate: 2016.03.1016:35:48 TLTReason:

ITEM NO.9 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 MR. M V RAMESH Civil Appeal No(s). 11332/2011 SURAJ MAL JAT & ANR. Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (with office report) Date : 27/01/2016 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Await certificate of service in respect of the respondent No.2 from the concerned High Court. List the matter again on 10.03.2016. (M V RAMESH) Registrar SB

MATTER FOR: 27.01.2016 COURT NO. R2 ITEM NO. 9 SECTIONXV IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 11332 OF 2011 SURAJ MAL JAT & ANR. ...APPELLANTS VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS OFFICE REPORT The matter abovementioned were listed before the Ld. Registrar's court on 06.11.2015, when the following Order was passed: “The office report is that the certificate of service in respect of the respondent No. 2 has not been received from the concerned High Court as yet. A reminder shall be issued. List the matter again on 27.01.2016.” It is submitted that Certificate of service in respect of respondent No. 2 has not been received from the High Court despite Reminder dated 06.01.2016. Service is incomplete upon respondent No. 2 in Civil Appeal as well as I.A. No. 3 . The matter abovementioned is listed before the Ld. Registrar's Court with this Office Report. Dated this the 21 st day of January, 2016. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to: Mr. Debasis Misra, Adv 207, New Lawyers Chambers, S.C.I., N.D. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

òITEM NO.9 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 MR. M V RAMESHCivil Appeal No(s). 11332/2011SURAJ MAL JAT & ANR. Appellant(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)(with office report)Date : 27/01/2016 This appeal was called on for hearing today.For Appellant(s) Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RAwait certificate of service in respect of the respondent No.2from the concerned High Court.List the matter again on 10.03.2016. (M V RAMESH) RegistrarSB

ITEM NO.12 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 MR. M V RAMESH Civil Appeal No(s). 11332/2011 SURAJ MAL JAT & ANR. Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (with office report) Date : 06/11/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr.Lalan Chaudhary,Adv. Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The office report is that the certificate of service in respect of the respondent No.2 has not been received from the concerned High Court as yet. A reminder shall be issued. List the matter again on 27.01.2016. (M V RAMESH) Registrar SB

MATTER FOR: 06.11.2015 COURT NO. R2 ITEM NO. 12 SECTIONXV IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 11332 OF 2011 SURAJ MAL JAT & ANR. ...APPELLANTS VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS OFFICE REPORT The matter abovementioned were listed before the Ld. Registrar's court on 02.08.2015, when the following order was passed: “The office report is that the certificate of service of notice in respect of the respondent No. 2 has not been received as yet. A reminder shall be issued. Await the return of the service of notice already issued to the respondent No. 2 in I.A. No. 3. Service of notice is complete on the respondent Nos. 1 & 3, but no one has entered appearance on their behalf. List the matter again on 06.11.2015.” It is submitted that Certificate of service is still awatied for the High Court in respect of respondent No. 2 despite Notice to all the respondents. Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 have been served through Certificate of service but no one has entered appearance so far. Service is incomplete upon respondent No. 2 in Civil Appeal as well as I.A. No. 3 . The matter abovementioned is listed before the Ld. Registrar's Court with this Office Report. Dated this the 5 th day of November, 2015. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to: Mr. Debasis Misra, Adv 207, New Lawyers Chambers, S.C.I., N.D. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

v ITEM NO.12 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 MR. M V RAMESH Civil Appeal No(s). 11332/2011 SURAJ MAL JAT & ANR. Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (with office report) Date : 06/11/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr.Lalan Chaudhary,Adv. Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The office report is that the certificate of service in respect of the respondent No.2 has not been received from the concerned High Court as yet. A reminder shall be issued. List the matter again on 27.01.2016. (M V RAMESH) Registrar SBSignature Not VerifiedDigitally signed bySushma Kumari BajajDate: 2015.11.0616:47:03 TLTReason:

ITEM NO.13 COURT NO.12 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal No(s). 8215/2013 SURESH CHAND JAIN Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (Office report on default) Date : 09/09/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVA KIRTI SINGH [IN CHAMBERS] For Appellant(s) Mr. P. K. Jain,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Learned counsel for the appellant undertakes to file the required spare copies by tomorrow. In view of matter, no order shall be required. (SWETA DHYANI) (TAPAN KUMAR CHAKRABORTY) SR.P.A. COURT MASTER

ITEM NO.10 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 DR. K.ARUL Civil Appeal No(s). 6096-6104/2012 GAJENDRA GAUR & ORS.ETC.ETC. Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 09/09/2015 These appeals were called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr.Ankit R.Kothari,Adv. Mr. Rajiv Shankar Dvivedi,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Milind Kumar,Adv. Mr. Mukul Kumar,Adv. Mr.Kunal Verma,adv. Mr.Prasanna Mohan,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Civil Appeal Nos.6100, 6102 & 6104/2012 In all the matters numbered above. Ld.counsel for the appellants shall file the statement of case within a period of 45 days and the Ld.counsel for the respondents shall file the same within a period of 35 days thereafter. In all other matters, await certificate of service in respect of the unserved respondents. List the matter again on 27.11.2015. (K.ARUL) Registrar SB

MATTER FOR: 09.09.2015 COURT NO. ITEM NO. SECTIONXV IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL (C) NOS. 60966104 OF 2012 GAJENDRA GAUR & ORS. ETC. ETC. ...APPELLANTS VERSUS [ STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS OFFICE REPORT CIVIL APPEAL(C)NO. 6096 OF 2012 It is submitted that there are 13 respondents in this matter. Respondent Nos. 15 are represented through Mr. Milind Kumar, Advocate. Certificate of service is awaited from the High Court in respect of respondent Nos. 6 to 13. Service is incomplete in respect of respondent Nos. 6 to 13. CIVIL APPEAL(C)NO. 6097 OF 2012 It is submitted that there are 16 respondents in this matter. Respondent Nos. 1 to 8 are represented through Mr. Milind Kumar, Advocate. Respondent Nos. 10 and 11 have been served through the High Court but no one has entered appearance so far. Certificate of service is awaited from the High Court in respect of respondent Nos. 9, 12 to 16. Service is incomplete in respect of respondent Nos. 9,12 to 16. CIVIL APPEAL(C)NOS. 6098 & 6099 OF 2012 It is submitted that there are 7 respondents in both the matters abovementioned. Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 are represented through Mr. Milind Kumar, Advocate. Certificate of service is await ed from the High Court in respect of respondent Nos. 4 to 7. Service is incomplete on respondent Nos. 4 to 7. CIVIL APPEAL(C)NO. 6100 OF 2012 It is submitted that there are 3 respondents in this matter. Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 are represented through Mr. Milind Kumar, Advocate. Service is complete.

..2.. ..2.. CIVIL APPEAL(C)NO. 6101 OF 2012 It is submitted that there are 4 respondents in this matter. Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 are represented through Mr. Milind Kumar, Advocate. Certificate of service is awaited from the High Court in respect of respondent No. 4. Service is incomplete on respondent No. 4. CIVIL APPEAL(C)NO. 6102 OF 2012 It is submitted that there are 4 respondents in this matter. Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 are represented through Mr. Milind Kumar, Advocate. Service is complete. CIVIL APPEAL(C)NO. 6103 OF 2012 I t is submitted that there are 12 respondents in this matter. Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 are represented through Mr. Milind Kumar, Advocate. Unserved Notice has been received back from the High Court in respect of Respondent No. 5 due to incomplete address. Certificate of service is awaited from the High Court in respect of respondent Nos. 4,6 to 12. Service is incomplete on respondent Nos. 4, 6 to 12. CIVIL APPEAL(C)NO. 6104 OF 2012 It is submitted that there are 3 respondents in this matter. Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 are represented through Mr. Milind Kumar, Advocate. Service is complete. The matters abovementioned are listed before the Ld. Registrar's Court with this Office Report. Dated this the 4 th day of September, 2015. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to: 1. Mr. Rajiv Shankar Dvivedi, Adv. 237, M.C. Setalvad Block, S.C.I., N.D. 2. Mr. Milind Kumar, Adv. 29, Lawyers Chambers, S.C.I., N.D.

3. Mr. Mukul Kumar, Adv. Supreme Court Bar Library, S.C.I., N.D. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

CHAMBER MATTER SECTIONXV IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 8215 OF 2013 SURESH CHAND JAIN ...APPELLANT VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS OFFICE REPORT ON DEFAULT The matter abovementioned was listed before the Hon'ble Court on 09.09.2013, when the Court was pleased to pass the following Order: “Delay condoned. Leave granted.” It is submitted that counsel for the appellant has not filed copies of the petition of Appeal. Hence, Notice for Lodgment of Petition of Appeal could not be issued to all the five respondents. It is further submitted that after some opportunities given by the Ld. Registrar's Court, the matter was again listed before the Ld. Registrar on 03.08.2015 when he was pleased to pass the following Order: “ The office report indicates that although vide order dated 13.4.2015 of this Court two weeks time as last chance was given to Learned Counsel for the appellant to file the spare copies of the petition, yet he has not done the needful within the period stipulated in the order. 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.” It is lastly submitted that pursuant to the order quoted above, the counsel for the appellant has still not filed copies of the petition of Appeal so far. Hence, Notice for Lodgment of Petition of Appeal could not be issued to all the five respondents. The default of the Advocate is reported before the Hon'ble JudgeinChambers with this Office Report. Dated this the 10 th day of August, 2015. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to:Mr. P.K. Jain, Adv. 418, New Lawyers Chambers, SCI, N.D. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

\204 ITEM NO.10 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 DR. K.ARUL Civil Appeal No(s). 6096-6104/2012 GAJENDRA GAUR & ORS.ETC.ETC. Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 09/09/2015 These appeals were called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr.Ankit R.Kothari,Adv. Mr. Rajiv Shankar Dvivedi,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Milind Kumar,Adv. Mr. Mukul Kumar,Adv. Mr.Kunal Verma,adv. Mr.Prasanna Mohan,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Civil Appeal Nos.6100, 6102 & 6104/2012 In all the matters numbered above. Ld.counsel for the appellants shall file the statement of case within a period of 45 days and the Ld.counsel for the respondents shall file the same within a period of 35 days thereafter. In all other matters, await certificate of service in respect of the unserved respondents. List the matter again on 27.11.2015.Signature Not Verified (K.ARUL) RegistrarDigitally signed bySushma Kumari BajajDate: 2015.09.11 SB15:04:11 TLTReason:

F ITEM NO.13 COURT NO.12 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal No(s). 8215/2013 SURESH CHAND JAIN Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (Office report on default) Date : 09/09/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVA KIRTI SINGH [IN CHAMBERS] For Appellant(s) Mr. P. K. Jain,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Learned counsel for the appellant undertakes to file the required spare copies by tomorrow. In view of matter, no order shall be required. (SWETA DHYANI) (TAPAN KUMAR CHAKRABORTY) SR.P.A. COURT MASTERSignature Not VerifiedDigitally signed byNeeta SapraDate: 2015.09.1211:49:40 ISTReason:

ITEM NO.15 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 MR. M K HANJURA Civil Appeal No(s). 11332/2011 SURAJ MAL JAT & ANR. Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 20/08/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr.Devendra Jha,Adv. Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr.S.S.Shamshery,adv. Ms.Ruchi Kohli,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The office report is that the certificate of service of notice in respect of the respondent No.2 has not been received as yet. A reminder shall be issued. Await the return of the service of notice already issued to the respondent No.2 in I.A.No.3. Service of notice is complete on the respondent Nos.1 & 3, but no one has entered appearance on their behalf. List the matter again on 06.11.2015. (M K HANJURA) Registrar SB

MATTER FOR: 20.08.2015 COURT NO. R2 ITEM NO. 15 SECTIONXV IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 11332 OF 2011 SURAJ MAL JAT & ANR. ...APPELLANTS VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS OFFICE REPORT It is submitted that there are three respondents in this appeal. Respondent Nos. 1 and 3 have been served through Certificate of Service but no one has entered appearance so far. Certificate of service is still awaited for the High Court in respect of respondent No. 2. It is further submitted that Counsel for the appellant has filed application for impleadment (I.A. No. 3) which has been listed before JudgeinChambers on 28.02.2014 and Notice was issued to all the three respondents through registered AD. AD Card duly signed has been received in respect of respondent Nos. 1 and 3 but, nothing has been received in respect of respondent No. 2. Service is incomplete upon respondent No. 2 in Civil Appeal as well as I.A. No. 3 . The matter abovementioned is listed before the Ld. Registrar's Court with this Office Report. Dated this the 19 th day of August, 2015. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to: Mr. Debasis Misra, Adv 207, New Lawyers Chambers, S.C.I., N.D. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

\206 ITEM NO.15 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 MR. M K HANJURA Civil Appeal No(s). 11332/2011 SURAJ MAL JAT & ANR. Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 20/08/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr.Devendra Jha,Adv. Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr.S.S.Shamshery,adv. Ms.Ruchi Kohli,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The office report is that the certificate of service of notice in respect of the respondent No.2 has not been received as yet. A reminder shall be issued. Await the return of the service of notice already issued to the respondent No.2 in I.A.No.3. Service of notice is complete on the respondent Nos.1 & 3, but no one has entered appearance on their behalf. List the matter again on 06.11.2015. (M K HANJURA) Registrar SBSignature Not VerifiedDigitally signed bySushma Kumari BajajDate: 2015.08.2212:29:17 TLTReason:

ITEM NO.14 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 MR. M K HANJURA Civil Appeal No(s). 8215/2013 SURESH CHAND JAIN Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (with office report) Date : 03/08/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. P. K. Jain,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The office report indicates that although vide order dated 13.4.2015 of this Court two weeks time as last chance was given to Learned Counsel for the appellant to file the spare copies of the petition, yet he has not done the needful within the period stipulated in the order. 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. (M K HANJURA) Registrar MG

MATTER FOR: 03.08.2015 COURT R2 ITEM NO. 14 SECTIONXV IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 8215 OF 2013 SURESH CHAND JAIN ...APPELLANT VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS OFFICE REPORT The matter abovementioned was listed before the Registrar Court on 13.04.2015 when the following order was passed: “ Two weeks time as last chance is given to the Ld. counsel for the appellant to file the spare copies of the petition, whereafter the NLPA shall be issued to the respondents with utmost dispatch. List again on 03.08.2015.” It is submitted that Counsel for the Appellant has not filed copies of Petition, therefore, NLPA to all the 5 respondents could not be issued. The matter abovementioned is listed before the Hon'ble Registrar Court with this Office Report. Dated this the 31 st day of July, 2015. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to: Mr. P.K. Jain, Adv. 418, New Lawyers Chambers, SCI, N.D. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

V ITEM NO.14 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 MR. M K HANJURA Civil Appeal No(s). 8215/2013 SURESH CHAND JAIN Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (with office report) Date : 03/08/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. P. K. Jain,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The office report indicates that although vide order dated 13.4.2015 of this Court two weeks time as last chance was given to Learned Counsel for the appellant to file the spare copies of the petition, yet he has not done the needful within the period stipulated in the order. 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.Signature Not Verified (M K HANJURA)Digitally signed byMadhu Grover Registrar MGDate: 2015.08.0416:26:54 SCTReason:

ITEM NO.107 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 K HANJURA Civil Appeal No(s). 1038/2012 JITENDRA SINGH PARMAR & ORS. Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (with office report) Date : 07/05/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Devendra Jha, Adv. Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Ruchi Kohli,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The office report is that the appellant has filed the statement of case and the Ld. Counsel for the respondents has failed to file the same although he has been notified to do so by notice dated 1.6.2012 of the Registry. Order XIX Rule 32 of the Supreme Court Rules,2013 provides that where the respondent has entered appearance and he does not file a statement of case within the time, as provided in Sub Rule(1) (i.e. 35 days) it shall be presumed that he does not desire to lodge the same. In view of the rule position cited above the matter shall be processed for listing before the Hon'ble Court under the rules. (M K HANJURA) Registrar KP

ITEM NO.16 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 K HANJURA Civil Appeal No(s). 1668/2012 MAHESH CHAND SAINI Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 21/04/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Ruchi Kohli,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The office report indicates that although by order dated 11.2.2015 of this Court three weeks time, as last chance was given to the learned counsel for the appellant to comply with the terms of the order of this Court dated 11.11.2014 of the Court, yet he has not done the needful within the period stipulated in the order. Viewed in that context, the matter shall be listed before the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers for further future directions. Await orders. List thereafter. (M K HANJURA) Registrar MG

z ITEM NO.16 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 K HANJURA Civil Appeal No(s). 1668/2012 MAHESH CHAND SAINI Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 21/04/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Ruchi Kohli,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The office report indicates that although by order dated 11.2.2015 of this Court three weeks time, as last chance was given to the learned counsel for the appellant to comply with the terms of the order of this Court dated 11.11.2014 of the Court, yet he has not done the needful within the period stipulated in the order. Viewed in that context, the matter shall be listed before the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers for further future directions. Await orders. List thereafter.Signature Not Verified (M K HANJURA)Digitally signed byMadhu GroverDate: 2015.04.22 Registrar MG12:25:42 CESTReason:

Item No. 104 1 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 K HANJURA Civil Appeal No(s). 1210/2012 BHAGIRATH MAL THALOR Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 20/04/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. T. Gopal,Adv. Ms. Aishwarya Bhati,Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Ruchi Kohli,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The office report is that the appellant has filed the statement of case and the Ld. Counsel for the respondents has failed to file the same within the period stipulated in the order dated 10.2.2015 of this Court. Viewed thus the matter shall be processed for listing before the Hon'ble Court under the rules. (M K HANJURA) Registrar MG

ITEM NO.19 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 K HANJURA Civil Appeal No(s). 8215/2013 SURESH CHAND JAIN Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (with office report) Date : 13/04/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. P. K. Jain,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Two weeks time as last chance is given to the Ld.counsel for the appellant to file the spare copies of the petition, whereafter the NLPA shall be issued to the respondents with utmost dispatch. List again on 03.08.2015. (M K HANJURA) Registrar SB

Þ ITEM NO.19 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 K HANJURA Civil Appeal No(s). 8215/2013 SURESH CHAND JAIN Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (with office report) Date : 13/04/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. P. K. Jain,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Two weeks time as last chance is given to the Ld.counsel for the appellant to file the spare copies of the petition, whereafter the NLPA shall be issued to the respondents with utmost dispatch. List again on 03.08.2015. (M K HANJURA) Registrar SBSignature Not VerifiedDigitally signed bySushma Kumari BajajDate: 2015.04.1615:46:26 ISTReason:

1 ITEM NO.1 COURT NO.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 Civil Appeal No(s). 7906/2010 MAHESH CHAND BARETH & ANR Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (With appln.(s) for impleadment) WITH C.A. No. 8302/2010 (With Office Report) C.A. Nos. 9328-9331/2010 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 10281/2010 (With Office Report) C.A. Nos. 2800-2802/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 2803/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. Nos. 2804-2805/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. Nos. 2806-2808/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 2921/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 2976/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 2977/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 2978/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 2979/2011 (With Office Report)

2 C.A. No. 2980/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 2981/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 2982/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 3730/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 3731/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 3732/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 4569/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 5180/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 5182/2011 C.A. No. 5183/2011 (With appln.(s) for permission to bring addl.facts and documents on record) C.A. No. 7646/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. Nos. 8656-8668/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 9618/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 10709/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 10710/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 10711/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 10712/2011 (With Office Report)

3 C.A. No. 11332/2011 (impleadment as petitioner) C.A. No. 11407/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 11442/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 1038/2012 (impleadment and office report) C.A. No. 1210/2012 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 1668/2012 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 4559/2012 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 6096-6104/2012 (With Office Report) C.A. Nos. 322/2013 (Transposing respondents as petitioners and Office Report) C.A. No. 6898/2012 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 8661/2012 (With Office Report) SLP(C) No. 34663/2013 (With Office Report) SLP(C) No. 34742/2013 (With Interim Relief and Office Report) Date : 11/03/2015 These appeals/petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MISHRA

4 For Appellant(s) Mr. Mukul Kumar,Adv. Ms. Aishwarya Bhati,Adv. Mr.T.Gopal, Adv. Mr.Amit Verma, Adv. Mr.Anshuman, Adv. Ms.Neha Meena, Adv. Ms.Madhurima Ghosh, Adv. Mr. P. K. Jain,Adv. Mr.Sushil Kr.Jain, Sr.Adv. Mr.Puneet Jain, Adv. Mr.Manish sharma, Adv. Mr.Abhinav Gupta, Adv. Mr.R.N.Poddar, Adv. For Ms. Pratibha Jain,Adv. Mr.D.K.Thakur, Adv. Mr.D.Jha, Adv. For Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv. Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Goyal,Adv. Mr. Sarad Kumar Singhania,Adv. Mr. Rajiv Shankar Dvivedi,Adv. Mr. Rakesh Dahiya,Adv. Mr. Praveen Swarup,Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Ruchi Kohli,Adv. Mr. R. Gopalakrishnan,Adv. Dr. Kailash Chand,Adv. Dr. Nirmal Chopra,Adv. Mr. Irshad Ahmad,Adv. Mr.Sameer Singh, Adv. Ms.Neelam Singh, Adv. Dr. Sushil Balwada,Adv. Mr.Kunal Verma, Adv. Mr. Milind Kumar,Adv.

5 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List the matters before a Bench of which one of us (Hon'ble Mr.Justice Arun Mishra) is not a Member. (G.V.Ramana) (Vinod Kulvi) Court Master Asstt.Registrar

²$ 1 ITEM NO.1 COURT NO.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 Civil Appeal No(s). 7906/2010 MAHESH CHAND BARETH & ANR Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (With appln.(s) for impleadment) WITH C.A. No. 8302/2010 (With Office Report) C.A. Nos. 9328-9331/2010 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 10281/2010 (With Office Report) C.A. Nos. 2800-2802/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 2803/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. Nos. 2804-2805/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. Nos. 2806-2808/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 2921/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 2976/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 2977/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 2978/2011Signature Not Verified (With Office Report)Digitally signed byRamana Venkata GantiDate: 2015.03.1217:19:07 IST C.A. No. 2979/2011Reason: (With Office Report) 2 C.A. No. 2980/2011(With Office Report) C.A. No. 2981/2011(With Office Report) C.A. No. 2982/2011

(With Office Report) C.A. No. 3730/2011(With Office Report) C.A. No. 3731/2011(With Office Report) C.A. No. 3732/2011(With Office Report) C.A. No. 4569/2011(With Office Report) C.A. No. 5180/2011(With Office Report) C.A. No. 5182/2011 C.A. No. 5183/2011(With appln.(s) for permission to bring addl.facts and documentson record) C.A. No. 7646/2011(With Office Report) C.A. Nos. 8656-8668/2011(With Office Report) C.A. No. 9618/2011(With Office Report) C.A. No. 10709/2011(With Office Report) C.A. No. 10710/2011(With Office Report) C.A. No. 10711/2011(With Office Report) C.A. No. 10712/2011(With Office Report) 3 C.A. No. 11332/2011(impleadment as petitioner) C.A. No. 11407/2011(With Office Report) C.A. No. 11442/2011(With Office Report) C.A. No. 1038/2012(impleadment and office report) C.A. No. 1210/2012(With Office Report) C.A. No. 1668/2012(With Office Report) C.A. No. 4559/2012(With Office Report) C.A. No. 6096-6104/2012(With Office Report) C.A. Nos. 322/2013

(Transposing respondents as petitioners and Office Report) C.A. No. 6898/2012(With Office Report) C.A. No. 8661/2012(With Office Report) SLP(C) No. 34663/2013(With Office Report) SLP(C) No. 34742/2013(With Interim Relief and Office Report)Date : 11/03/2015 These appeals/petitions were called on forhearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MISHRA 4For Appellant(s) Mr. Mukul Kumar,Adv. Ms. Aishwarya Bhati,Adv. Mr.T.Gopal, Adv. Mr.Amit Verma, Adv. Mr.Anshuman, Adv. Ms.Neha Meena, Adv. Ms.Madhurima Ghosh, Adv. Mr. P. K. Jain,Adv. Mr.Sushil Kr.Jain, Sr.Adv. Mr.Puneet Jain, Adv. Mr.Manish sharma, Adv. Mr.Abhinav Gupta, Adv. Mr.R.N.Poddar, Adv. For Ms. Pratibha Jain,Adv. Mr.D.K.Thakur, Adv. Mr.D.Jha, Adv. For Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv. Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Goyal,Adv. Mr. Sarad Kumar Singhania,Adv. Mr. Rajiv Shankar Dvivedi,Adv. Mr. Rakesh Dahiya,Adv. Mr. Praveen Swarup,Adv.For Respondent(s) Ms. Ruchi Kohli,Adv. Mr. R. Gopalakrishnan,Adv. Dr. Kailash Chand,Adv. Dr. Nirmal Chopra,Adv. Mr. Irshad Ahmad,Adv. Mr.Sameer Singh, Adv. Ms.Neelam Singh, Adv. Dr. Sushil Balwada,Adv.

Mr.Kunal Verma, Adv. Mr. Milind Kumar,Adv. 5 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List the matters before a Bench of which one of us(Hon'ble Mr.Justice Arun Mishra) is not a Member.(G.V.Ramana) (Vinod Kulvi)Court Master Asstt.Registrar

1 ITEM NO.3 COURT NO.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 Civil Appeal No(s).7906 of 2010 MAHESH CHAND BARETH & ANR Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH C.A. No. 8302/2010 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 9328-9331/2010 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 10281/2010 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 2800-2802/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 2803/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 2804-2805/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 2806-2808/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 2921/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 2976/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 2977/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 2978/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 2979/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 2980/2011 (With Office Report)

2 C.A. No. 2981/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 2982/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 3730/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 3731/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 3732/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 4569/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 5180/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 5182/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 5183/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 7646/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 8656-8668/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 9618/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 10709/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 10710/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 10711/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 10712/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 11332/2011 (With Office Report)

3 C.A. No. 11407/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 11442/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 1038/2012 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 1210/2012 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 1668/2012 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 4559/2012 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 6096-6104/2012 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 322/2013 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 6898/2012 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 8661/2012 (With Office Report) SLP(C) No. 34663/2013 (With Office Report) SLP(C) No. 34742/2013 (With Interim Relief and Office Report) Date : 25/02/2015 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MISHRA For Appellant(s) Mr. Sushil Kumar Jain, Sr. Adv. Mr. Manish Sharma, Adv. Ms. Chhay Kirti, Adv. Mr. Abhinav Gupta, Adv. Mr. R.N. Poddar, Adv. Ms. Aishwarya Bhati,Adv. Mr. T. Gopal, Adv. Mr. Adarsh K. Tiwari, Adv. Mr. Aditya Pratap Singh Narulla, Adv.

4 Mr. Shubham Sri Seth, Adv Mr. Dinesh Kumar, Adv. Mr. P. K. Jain,Adv. Ms. Pratibha Jain,Adv. Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv. Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Goyal,Adv. Mr. Rishi Matoliya, Adv. Mr. Sarad Kumar Singhania,Adv. Mr. Ajay Choudhary,Adv. Mr. Rakesh Dahiya,Adv. Mr. Praveen Swarup,Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Ruchi Kohli,Adv. Mr. Nirmal Goenka, Adv. Ms. Nidhi Jaswal, Adv. Mr. R. Gopalakrishnan,Adv. Dr. Kailash Chand,Adv. Dr. Nirmal Chopra,Adv. Mr. Irshad Ahmad,Adv. Dr. Sushil Balwada,Adv. Mr. Kunal Verma, Adv. Mr. Milind Kumar,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R As prayed on behalf of the appellant(s)/petitioner(s), list this matter after the ensuing Holi holidays. (Neetu Khajuria) Sr.P.A. (Vinod Kulvi) Assistant Registrar

¦# 1 ITEM NO.3 COURT NO.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 Civil Appeal No(s).7906 of 2010 MAHESH CHAND BARETH & ANR Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH C.A. No. 8302/2010 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 9328-9331/2010 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 10281/2010 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 2800-2802/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 2803/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 2804-2805/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 2806-2808/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 2921/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 2976/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 2977/2011 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 2978/2011Signature Not Verified (With Office Report)Digitally signed byNEETU KHAJURIADate: 2015.02.2618:36:54 IST C.A. No. 2979/2011Reason: (With Office Report) C.A. No. 2980/2011 (With Office Report) 2 C.A. No. 2981/2011(With Office Report) C.A. No. 2982/2011

(With Office Report) C.A. No. 3730/2011(With Office Report) C.A. No. 3731/2011(With Office Report) C.A. No. 3732/2011(With Office Report) C.A. No. 4569/2011(With Office Report) C.A. No. 5180/2011(With Office Report) C.A. No. 5182/2011(With Office Report) C.A. No. 5183/2011(With Office Report) C.A. No. 7646/2011(With Office Report) C.A. No. 8656-8668/2011(With Office Report) C.A. No. 9618/2011(With Office Report) C.A. No. 10709/2011(With Office Report) C.A. No. 10710/2011(With Office Report) C.A. No. 10711/2011(With Office Report) C.A. No. 10712/2011(With Office Report) C.A. No. 11332/2011(With Office Report) 3C.A. No. 11407/2011(With Office Report) C.A. No. 11442/2011(With Office Report) C.A. No. 1038/2012(With Office Report) C.A. No. 1210/2012(With Office Report) C.A. No. 1668/2012(With Office Report) C.A. No. 4559/2012(With Office Report) C.A. No. 6096-6104/2012(With Office Report)

C.A. No. 322/2013(With Office Report) C.A. No. 6898/2012(With Office Report) C.A. No. 8661/2012(With Office Report) SLP(C) No. 34663/2013(With Office Report) SLP(C) No. 34742/2013(With Interim Relief and Office Report)Date : 25/02/2015 These matters were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MISHRAFor Appellant(s) Mr. Sushil Kumar Jain, Sr. Adv. Mr. Manish Sharma, Adv. Ms. Chhay Kirti, Adv. Mr. Abhinav Gupta, Adv. Mr. R.N. Poddar, Adv. Ms. Aishwarya Bhati,Adv. Mr. T. Gopal, Adv. Mr. Adarsh K. Tiwari, Adv. Mr. Aditya Pratap Singh Narulla, Adv. 4 Mr. Shubham Sri Seth, Adv Mr. Dinesh Kumar, Adv. Mr. P. K. Jain,Adv. Ms. Pratibha Jain,Adv. Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv. Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Goyal,Adv. Mr. Rishi Matoliya, Adv. Mr. Sarad Kumar Singhania,Adv. Mr. Ajay Choudhary,Adv. Mr. Rakesh Dahiya,Adv. Mr. Praveen Swarup,Adv.For Respondent(s) Ms. Ruchi Kohli,Adv. Mr. Nirmal Goenka, Adv. Ms. Nidhi Jaswal, Adv. Mr. R. Gopalakrishnan,Adv. Dr. Kailash Chand,Adv. Dr. Nirmal Chopra,Adv. Mr. Irshad Ahmad,Adv. Dr. Sushil Balwada,Adv. Mr. Kunal Verma, Adv.

Mr. Milind Kumar,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R As prayed on behalf of the appellant(s)/petitioner(s), list this matter after the ensuing Holi holidays. (Neetu Khajuria) (Vinod Kulvi) Sr.P.A. Assistant Registrar

ITEM NO.25 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 MRS. RACHNA GUPTA Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 34742/2013 KUMARI SARITA AND ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (with interim relief and office report) WITH SLP(C) No. 34663/2013 (With Office Report) Date : 24/02/2015 These petitions were called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Praveen Swarup,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Respondent no. 1 is common to both the petitions. Notice was served upon respondent no. 1 through standing counsel but Vakalatanama has not been filed. In fact, none present today. Service of respondent nos. 2 to 11 I SLP(C) No. 34742/2013 and of respondent nos. 2 and 3 in SLP(C) No. 34663/2013 is still awaited. List on 15 th April, 2015. (RACHNA GUPTA ) Registrar

v ITEM NO.25 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 MRS. RACHNA GUPTA Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 34742/2013 KUMARI SARITA AND ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (with interim relief and office report) WITH SLP(C) No. 34663/2013 (With Office Report) Date : 24/02/2015 These petitions were called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Praveen Swarup,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Respondent no. 1 is common to both the petitions. Notice was served upon respondent no. 1 through standing counsel but Vakalatanama has not been filed. In fact, none present today. Service of respondent nos. 2 to 11 I SLP(C) No. 34742/2013 and of respondent nos. 2 and 3 in SLP(C) No. 34663/2013 is still awaited. List on 15th April, 2015.Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed byHema JoshiDate: 2015.02.2515:39:28 ISTReason: (RACHNA GUPTA) Registrar

ITEM NO.13 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 K HANJURA Civil Appeal No(s). 1668/2012 MAHESH CHAND SAINI Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH C.A. No. 4559/2012 (With Office Report) Date : 11/02/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv. Mr.Adarsh Kumar Tiwari,adv. Ms. Aishwarya Bhati,Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Ruchi Kohli,Adv. Mr. Milind Kumar,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Civil Appeal No.1668/2012 The respondent Nos.1-3 have already filed the counter affidavit as gets revealed from the perusal of the office report. Three weeks time as last chance is given to the Ld.counsel for the appellant to comply with the terms of the order dated 11.11.2014 of this Court. … ...2

ITEM NO.13 -2- Civil Appeal No.4559/2012 The office report is that the certificate of service of notice already issued to the unserved respondent No.4 has not been received as yet. A reminder shall be issued. List again on 21.04.2015. (M K HANJURA) Registrar SB

È ITEM NO.13 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 K HANJURA Civil Appeal No(s). 1668/2012 MAHESH CHAND SAINI Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH C.A. No. 4559/2012 (With Office Report) Date : 11/02/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv. Mr.Adarsh Kumar Tiwari,adv. Ms. Aishwarya Bhati,Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Ruchi Kohli,Adv. Mr. Milind Kumar,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Civil Appeal No.1668/2012 The respondent Nos.1-3 have already filed the counter affidavit as gets revealed from the perusal of the office report. Three weeks time as last chance is given to the Ld.counsel forSignature Not Verified theDigitally signed bySushma Kumari Bajaj appellant to comply with the terms of the order datedDate: 2015.02.13 11.11.2014 of this Court.15:25:43 ISTReason: ......2ITEM NO.13 -2-

Civil Appeal No.4559/2012 The office report is that the certificate of service of noticealready issued to the unserved respondent No.4 has not beenreceived as yet. A reminder shall be issued. List again on 21.04.2015. (M K HANJURA) RegistrarSB

ITEM NO.99 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 K HANJURA Civil Appeal No(s). 11407/2011 RAMKARAN GURJAR Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH C.A. No. 1210/2012 (With Office Report) Date : 10/02/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr.Hemendra Sharma,adv. Ms. Aishwarya Bhati,Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Ruchi Kohli,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Civil Appeal No.11407/2011 The office report is that the Ld.counsel for the appellant has already filed the statement of case. Service of notice is complete on the respondents, but no one has entered appearance on their behalf. Viewed in that context, the matter shall be processed for listing before the Hon'ble Court as and when the connected one gets ready. … ...2

ITEM NO.99 -2- Civil Appeal No.1210/2012 What gets revealed from the perusal of the office report is that the Ld.counsel for the appellant has already filed the statement of case. Ld.counsel for the respondents shall be at liberty to file the statement of case within a period of 35 days. List again on 20.04.2015. (M K HANJURA) Registrar SB

æ ITEM NO.99 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 K HANJURA Civil Appeal No(s). 11407/2011 RAMKARAN GURJAR Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH C.A. No. 1210/2012 (With Office Report) Date : 10/02/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr.Hemendra Sharma,adv. Ms. Aishwarya Bhati,Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Ruchi Kohli,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Civil Appeal No.11407/2011 The office report is that the Ld.counsel for the appellant has already filed the statement of case. Service of notice is complete on the respondents, but no one has entered appearance on their behalf. Viewed in that context, the matter shall be processed for listing before the Hon'ble Court as and when the connected one gets ready.Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed bySushma Kumari BajajDate: 2015.02.1115:48:47 ISTReason: ......2ITEM NO.99 -2- Civil Appeal No.1210/2012 What gets revealed from the perusal of the office report isthat the Ld.counsel for the appellant has already filed thestatement of case. Ld.counsel for the respondents shall be atliberty to file the statement of case within a period of 35 days. List again on 20.04.2015.

(M K HANJURA) RegistrarSB

ITEM NO.27 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 K HANJURA Civil Appeal No(s). 8215/2013 SURESH CHAND JAIN Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (with office report) Date : 04/02/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. P. K. Jain,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R File not received. List again on 13.4.2015. (M K HANJURA) Registrar MG

ITEM NO.1 COURT NO.13 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. No. 2/2013 in Civil Appeal No(s). 322/2013 BALDEV SINGH & ORS. Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (for transposing proforma respondent no.27 as appellant and office report) Date : 16/01/2015 This application was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAMAJIT SEN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. NAGAPPAN For Appellant(s) Mr. Rakesh Dahiya,Adv. Mr. Aditya Jain, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. S.S. Shamshery, Adv. Mr. Amit Sharma, Adv. Ms. Ruchi Kohli,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R There is rightly no objection to the Application for transposing Proforma Respondent No. 27 as appellant, which is accordingly allowed. Proforma No. 27 is allowed to be transposed as Appellant. Amended memo of parties be filed within one week. List thereafter. (NEELAM GULATI) COURT MASTER (SAROJ SAINI) COURT MASTER

Ô ITEM NO.1 COURT NO.13 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. No. 2/2013 in Civil Appeal No(s). 322/2013 BALDEV SINGH & ORS. Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (for transposing proforma respondent no.27 as appellant and office report) Date : 16/01/2015 This application was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAMAJIT SEN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. NAGAPPAN For Appellant(s) Mr. Rakesh Dahiya,Adv. Mr. Aditya Jain, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. S.S. Shamshery, Adv. Mr. Amit Sharma, Adv. Ms. Ruchi Kohli,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R There is rightly no objection to the Application for transposing Proforma Respondent No. 27 as appellant, which is accordingly allowed. Proforma No. 27 is allowed to be transposed as Appellant. Amended memo of parties be filed within one week. List thereafter.Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed byUsha Rani BhardwajDate: 2015.01.1712:24:11 ISTReason: (NEELAM GULATI) (SAROJ SAINI) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER

ITEM NO.49 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 MR. SURAJIT DEY Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 34742/2013 KUMARI SARITA AND ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (with interim relief and office report) WITH SLP(C) No. 34663/2013 (With Office Report) Date : 07/01/2015 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Ms Sushma Verma, Adv. Mr. Praveen Swarup,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Though office report suggested that requisite spare copies of the SLP have not been filed. However, the Ld. Counsel for the petitioner submits that spare copies has long been filed with the registry. Registry to verify and upon finding out the same, issue process forthwith. List again on 24.2.2015. (SURAJIT DEY) Registrar

ITEM NO.2 COURT NO.13 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. No. 2/2013 in Civil Appeal No.322/2013 BALDEV SINGH & ORS. Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (for transposing respondents No.27 as appellant and office report) Date : 12/12/2014 This application was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAMAJIT SEN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAFULLA C. PANT For Appellant(s) Mr. Rakesh Dahiya,Adv. Mr. Hanuman Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Aditya Jain, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. S.S. Shamshery, Adv. Mr. Amit Sharma, Adv. Ms. Ruchi Kohli,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The permission of the appellants has not been obtained prior to the moving of this application for transposition of proforma Respondent No.27 as appellant. As prayed for, the matter is adjourned. (USHA BHARDWAJ) (SAROJ SAINI) AR-CUM-PS (COURT MASTER)

ú ITEM NO.2 COURT NO.13 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. No. 2/2013 in Civil Appeal No.322/2013 BALDEV SINGH & ORS. Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (for transposing respondents No.27 as appellant and office report) Date : 12/12/2014 This application was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAMAJIT SEN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAFULLA C. PANT For Appellant(s) Mr. Rakesh Dahiya,Adv. Mr. Hanuman Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Aditya Jain, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. S.S. Shamshery, Adv. Mr. Amit Sharma, Adv. Ms. Ruchi Kohli,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The permission of the appellants has not been obtained prior to the moving of this application for transposition of proforma Respondent No.27 as appellant. As prayed for, the matter is adjourned. (USHA BHARDWAJ) (SAROJ SAINI) AR-CUM-PS (COURT MASTER)Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed byUsha Rani BhardwajDate: 2014.12.1216:42:42 ISTReason:

ITEM NO.36 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 K HANJURA Civil Appeal No(s). 8215/2013 SURESH CHAND JAIN Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (with office report) Date : 20/11/2014 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. P. K. Jain,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Ld.counsel for the appellant shall comply with the terms of the office report within a period of four weeks, whereafter no further extension shall be provided. List again on 4.02.2015. (M K HANJURA) Registrar SB

Ê ITEM NO.36 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 K HANJURA Civil Appeal No(s). 8215/2013 SURESH CHAND JAIN Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (with office report) Date : 20/11/2014 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. P. K. Jain,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Ld.counsel for the appellant shall comply with the terms of the office report within a period of four weeks, whereafter no further extension shall be provided. List again on 4.02.2015. (M K HANJURA) Registrar SBSignature Not VerifiedDigitally signed bySushma Kumari BajajDate: 2014.11.2410:04:26 ISTReason:

ITEM NO.20 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 K HANJURA Civil Appeal No(s). 1668/2012 MAHESH CHAND SAINI Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 11/11/2014 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Nidhi Jaswal,Adv. Ms. Ruchi Kohli,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The learned counsel for the appellant shall file the fresh particulars of the respondent No.6 within a period of three weeks' and he shall also take appropriate steps for the service of notice to him within the same period. The Learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 seeks and is given four weeks' time to file the counter affidavit. List again on 22.1.2015. (M K HANJURA) Registrar MG

Þ ITEM NO.20 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 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 K HANJURA Civil Appeal No(s). 1668/2012 MAHESH CHAND SAINI Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 11/11/2014 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Nidhi Jaswal,Adv. Ms. Ruchi Kohli,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The learned counsel for the appellant shall file the fresh particulars of the respondent No.6 within a period of three weeks' and he shall also take appropriate steps for the service of notice to him within the same period. The Learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 seeks and is given four weeks' time to file the counter affidavit. List again on 22.1.2015.Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed byMadhu Grover (M K HANJURA)Date: 2014.11.1216:33:25 ISTReason: Registrar MG

ITEM NO.61 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 PANKAJ BHANDARI Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 34742/2013 KUMARI SARITA AND ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (with interim relief and office report) WITH SLP(C) No. 34663/2013 (With Office Report) Date : 28/10/2014 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Praveen Swarup,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Show cause notices could not be issued as requisite spare copies were not filed by the petitioner. Last opportunity is granted to the ld. Counsel for the petitioner. Requisite spare copies be filed within two weeks. List again on 7.1.2015. (PANKAJ BHANDARI) Registrar

> ITEM NO.61 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 PANKAJ BHANDARI Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 34742/2013 KUMARI SARITA AND ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (with interim relief and office report) WITH SLP(C) No. 34663/2013 (With Office Report) Date : 28/10/2014 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Praveen Swarup,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Show cause notices could not be issued as requisite spare copies were not filed by the petitioner. Last opportunity is granted to the ld. Counsel for the petitioner. Requisite spare copies be filed within two weeks. List again on 7.1.2015.Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed byHema JoshiDate: 2014.10.30 (PANKAJ BHANDARI)10:15:39 ISTReason: Registrar

CHAMBER MATTER SECTION XV THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICATION CIVIL APPEAL NOs. 7906/2010 & 1668/2012 MAHESH CHAND BARETH & ANR. …. APPELLANTS VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. …. RESPONDENTS OFFICE REPORT ON DEFAULT CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7906/2010 The matter abovementioned was listed before Hon'ble Judge in Chambers on 06.01.2014, when His Lodrdships was pleased to pass the following order: “ Last opportunity is granted to the appellants to file statement of case within six weeks and to the respondents within 8 weeks thereafter.” It is submitted that there are 11 respondents in the abovementioned appeal. Respondent No. 1 is represented through Advocate. Certificate of service in respect of all the remaining respondents has been received but no one has entered appearance so far. Service is Complete. The Original Record has been received from the High Court & is ready for reference. Counsel for Appellants has filed Statement of Case. Counsel for Respondent No. 1 has not filed Statement of case so far. CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1668/2012 It is submitted that leave has been granted in this appeal. The Notice of Lodgement of Petition of Appeal has been sent to Concerned High Court but the High Court has not sent the Original record & certificate of service respect of Respondent No. 6 so far.

The appeals abovementioned are listed before the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers with this Office Report on Default. Dated this the 16 th Day of August, 2014 ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

l ITEM NO.31 COURT NO.14 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal No(s). 7906/2010 MAHESH CHAND BARETH & ANR Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (office report on default) WITH C.A. No. 1668/2012 (Office report on default) Date : 19/08/2014 These appeals were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. GOPALA GOWDA [IN CHAMBER] For Appellant(s) Mr. Sarad Kumar Singhania ,Adv. Mr. Debasis Misra ,Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Ruchi Kohli ,Adv. Ms. Nidhi Jaswal,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R In C.A.No. 7906/2010 respondent No.6 has not filed the statement of case despite the time granted on 6.1.2014. Hence, his right to file the same is forfeited. In C.A.No. 1668/2012 to await service on respondent no.6. Two weeks' time is granted to the learned counsel for the petitioner to take steps to serve respondent no.6.Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by (SUMAN WADHWA) (MALA KUMARI SHARMA)Suman WadhwaDate: 2014.08.2016:36:17 IST AR-cum-PS COURT MASTERReason:

( ITEM NO.66 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 PANKAJ BHANDARI Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 34742/2013 KUMARI SARITA AND ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH SLP(C) No. 34663/2013 (With appln.(s) for Office Report) Date : 30/07/2014 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Ms Sushma Verma, Adv. Mr. Praveen Swarup ,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Petitioner to file process fee and spare copies within two weeks for effecting service on the respondents. Office to issue notices. List again on 28.10.2014. (PANKAJ BHANDARI) RegistrarSignature Not VerifiedDigitally signed byHema JoshiDate: 2014.08.0116:03:33 ISTReason:

REVISED ITEM NO.26 COURT NO.10 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal No(s). 10711/2011 RAM GOPAL SHARMA Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (Office report on default) Date : 18/07/2014 This appeal was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FAKKIR MOHAMED IBRAHIM KALIFULLA [IN CHAMBER] For Appellant(s) Mr. Anuj Bhandari,Adv. Mr. Sarad Kumar Singhania ,Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Sandeep Singh,Adv. Ms. Ruchi Kohli ,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Four weeks' time granted to the learned counsel for the appellant subject to deposit of Rs.500/- towards cost with the Supreme Court Bar Association Lawyers' Welfare Fund. Subject to compliance of the above, the Registry may accept the statement of case of the appellant. (SUMAN WADHWA) AR-cum-PS (SUMAN JAIN) COURT MASTER

ITEM NO.26 COURT NO.10 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal No(s). 10711/2011 RAM GOPAL SHARMA Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (Office report on default) Date : 18/07/2014 This appeal was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FAKKIR MOHAMED IBRAHIM KALIFULLA [IN CHAMBER] For Appellant(s) Mr. Anuj Bhandari,Adv. Mr. Sarad Kumar Singhania ,Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Sandeep Singh,Adv. Ms. Ruchi Kohli ,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Four weeks' time granted to the learned counsel for the appellant subject to deposit of Rs.500/- towards cost with the Supreme Court Bar Association Lawyers' Association Fund. Subject to compliance of the above, the Registry may accept the statement of case of the appellant. (SUMAN WADHWA) AR-cum-PS (SUMAN JAIN) COURT MASTER

ô REVISED ITEM NO.26 COURT NO.10 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal No(s). 10711/2011 RAM GOPAL SHARMA Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (Office report on default) Date : 18/07/2014 This appeal was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FAKKIR MOHAMED IBRAHIM KALIFULLA [IN CHAMBER] For Appellant(s) Mr. Anuj Bhandari,Adv. Mr. Sarad Kumar Singhania ,Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Sandeep Singh,Adv. Ms. Ruchi Kohli ,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Four weeks' time granted to the learned counsel for the appellant subject to deposit of Rs.500/- towards cost with the Supreme Court Bar Association Lawyers' Welfare Fund. Subject to compliance of the above, the Registry may accept the statement of case of the appellant. (SUMAN WADHWA) (SUMAN JAIN) AR-cum-PS COURT MASTERSignature Not VerifiedDigitally signed bySuman WadhwaDate: 2014.08.2716:10:53 ISTReason:ITEM NO.26 COURT NO.10 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSCivil Appeal No(s). 10711/2011RAM GOPAL SHARMA Appellant(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)(Office report on default)Date : 18/07/2014 This appeal was called on for hearing today.CORAM :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FAKKIR MOHAMED IBRAHIM KALIFULLA [IN CHAMBER]For Appellant(s) Mr. Anuj Bhandari,Adv. Mr. Sarad Kumar Singhania ,Adv.For Respondent(s) Ms. Sandeep Singh,Adv. Ms. Ruchi Kohli ,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Four weeks' time granted to the learned counsel for the appellant subject to deposit of Rs.500/- towards cost with the Supreme Court Bar Association Lawyers' Association Fund. Subject to compliance of the above, the Registry may accept the statement of case of the appellant. (SUMAN WADHWA) (SUMAN JAIN) AR-cum-PS COURT MASTER

lITEM NO.13 COURT NO.9 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IA 3/2013 in CIVIL APPEAL NO. 11332 OF 2011SURAJ MAL JAT & ANR. Appellant (s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for impleadment as petitioner)Date: 15/04/2014 This Appln. was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. GOPALA GOWDA (In Chambers)For Appellant(s) Mr. D.K. Thakur, Adv. Mr. Bhupendra Sharma, Adv. Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Await service of notice on the respondents. (NAVEEN KUMAR) (S.S.R. KRISHNA) COURT MASTER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

\234ITEM NO.10 COURT NO.9 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IA 3/2013 in CIVIL APPEAL NO. 11332 OF 2011SURAJ MAL JAT & ANR. Appellant (s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)( for impleadment as petitioner)Date: 07/04/2014 This Appeal was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. GOPALA GOWDA (In Chambers)For Appellant(s) Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv.(NP)For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R None appears. List next week. (SUMAN WADHWA) (P.S.N.MURTHY) AR-cum-PS COURT MASTER

\226ITEM NO.82 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. SAYEEDPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).34742/2013KUMARI SARITA AND ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)(With prayer for interim relief and office report )WITH SLP(C) NO. 34663 of 2013(With office report)Date: 04/04/2014 This Petition was called on for hearing today.For Petitioner(s) Ms Sushma Verma, Adv. Mr. Praveen Swarup,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R On filing of process fee and spare copies, notices bere issued to the respondents through the concerned DistrictCourt in addition to usual mode. Respondent no.1 being State authority be servedthrough the standing counsel. Dasti allowed. List again on 30.7.2014. (M.A. SAYEED) REGISTRARhj

JITEM NO.26 REGISTRAR COURT.2 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CIVIL APPEAL NO(s). 8661 OF 2012 BEFORE THE REGISTRAR M.K. HANJURAPRADEEP KUMAR SHARMA & ORS. Appellant (s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)Date: 26/03/2014 This Appeal was called on for hearing today.For Appellant(s) Mr.D.K.Thakur,adv. Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R|Ld.counsel for the appellants is present. || ||Await the return of the service of notice already issued to the||respondent Nos.1-3. The original record has also not been ||received. A reminder shall be issued. ||List again on 18.07.2014. | | | |(M.K.HANJURA) || | |Registrar |SB

fITEM NO.32 REGISTRAR COURT.2 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.K. HANJURA CIVIL APPEAL NO(s). 1668 OF 2012MAHESH CHAND SAINI Appellant (s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)Date: 25/03/2014 This Appeal was called on for hearing today.For Appellant(s) Mr. Devender Jha,Adv. Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The learned counsel for the appellant is present. None for the respondent. What gets revealed from the perusal of the office report is that the original record has not been received from the concerned High Court and the Certificate of Service in respect of unserved respondent Nos. 1 to 12 is also awaited. A reminder shall be issued. List again on 17.7.2014.| | | (M.K. HANJURA) ||mg | |Registrar |

äITEM NO.13 REGISTRAR COURT.2 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 SUNIL THOMAS CIVIL APPEAL NO(s). 1668 OF 2012MAHESH CHAND SAINI Appellant (s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)Date: 24/02/2014 This Appeal was called on for hearing today.For Appellant(s) Mr. Devendra Jha,Adv. Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Await return of notice of NLPA. List the matter on 14.3.2014.| | |(SUNIL THOMAS) ||mg | |Registrar |

âITEM NO.43 REGISTRAR COURT.2 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CIVIL APPEAL NO(s). 8661 OF 2012 BEFORE THE REGISTRAR SUNIL THOMASPRADEEP KUMAR SHARMA & ORS. Appellant (s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)Date: 21/02/2014 This Appeal was called on for hearing today.For Appellant(s) Mr.Devendra Jha,adv. Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Await return of notice in NLPA. List the matter on 25.03.2014. | | |(Sunil Thomas) || | |Registrar |SB

èITEM NO.9 COURT NO.10 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).34742/2013(From the judgement and order dated 06/08/2012 in DBSA No.905/2012 of TheHIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR)KUMARI SARITA AND ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)(With prayer for interim relief and office report)WITH SLP(C) NO. 34663 of 2013(With appln. for c/delay in refiling SLP and office report)Date: 24/01/2014 These Petitions were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.L. GOKHALE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRAFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Akshay Verma, Adv. Ms. Sushma Verma, Adv. Mr. Virag Gupta, Adv. Mr. Praveen Swarup,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Issue notice returnable after six weeks. Tag along with Civil Appeal No.3730/2011 etc. [Usha Bhardwaj] [Sneh Lata Sharma] A.R-cum-P.S. Court Master

®ITEM NO.44 COURT NO.13 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CIVIL APPEAL NO(s). 7906 OF 2010MAHESH CHAND BARETH & ANR Appellant (s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)(Office Report on Default)Date: 06/01/2014 This Appeal was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN B. LOKUR (IN CHAMBERS)For Appellant(s) Mr. Sarad Kumar Singhania,Adv.For Respondent(s) Mr. Rajat Soni, Adv. Ms. Pragati Neekhra,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Last opportunity is granted to the appellants to file statement of case within six weeks and to the respondents within 8 weeks thereafter. |(Vishal Anand) | |(Sneh Lata Sharma) ||Court Master | |Court Master |

(ITEM NO.4 COURT NO.1 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSIA 3 in CIVIL APPEAL NO. 9618 OF 2011BHANA RAM Appellant (s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for early hearing and office report)Date: 02/01/2014 This petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOIFor Appellant(s)/ Mr. Sarad Kumar Singhania,Adv. ApplicantFor Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R I.A. for early hearing is dismissed for the present. Counsel is permitted to renew it in the year 2015. [Madhu Bala] [Savita Sainani] Court Master Assistant Registrar

hITEM NO.33 COURT NO.10 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7906 OF 2010MAHESH CHAND BARETH & ANR Appellant (s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)(Office report on default)Date: 02/12/2013 This Appeal was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J. CHELAMESWAR (IN CHAMBER)For Appellant(s) Mr. Sarad Kumar Singhania,Adv.For Respondent(s) Mr. Parth Tiwari, Adv. Ms. Pragati Neekhra,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Adjourned by two weeks as requested by learned counsel for the appellants. [Usha Bhardwaj] [Sneh Lata Sharma] A.R-cum-P.S. Court Master

úITEM NO.40 REGISTRAR COURT.2 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 SUNIL THOMAS CIVIL APPEAL NO(s). 1668 OF 2012MAHESH CHAND SAINI Appellant (s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)Date: 26/09/2013 This Appeal was called on for hearing today.For Appellant(s) Mr. D.K. Thakur,Adv. Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The learned counsel for the appellant seeks two weeks time for remitting the process fee and spare copy. Permitted. If steps are taken, issue notice. Await. List the matter on 3.12.2013.| | |(SUNIL THOMAS) ||mg | |Registrar |

¼ITEM NO.55 REGISTRAR COURT.2 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 SUNIL THOMAS CIVIL APPEAL NO(s). 8661 OF 2012PRADEEP KUMAR SHARMA & ORS. Appellant (s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)Date: 25/09/2013 This Appeal was called on for hearing today.For Appellant(s) Mr. D.K. Thakur,Adv. Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The Ld. counsel for the appellant seeks two weeks time for remitting the process fee and spare copy. Granted . Issue notice. Await. List the matter on 2.12.2013.| | |(SUNIL THOMAS) ||mg | |Registrar |

ºITEM NO.14 COURT NO.9 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSI.A. No.1 inPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil)....../2013(CC 16017/2013)(From the judgement and order dated 06/08/2012 in DBSA No.905/2012 of TheHIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR)KUMARI SARITA AND ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for c/delay in refiling SLP and office report)Date: 09/09/2013 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FAKKIR MOHAMED IBRAHIM KALIFULLA (In Chambers)For Petitioner(s) Mr. Praveen Swarup,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R I have gone through the application seeking condonation of delay of 253 days in refiling the special leave petition. On being satisfied, the delay stands condoned subject to the petitioners' depositing a cost of Rs.500/- with the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee within a period of two weeks from today. [ Alka Dudeja ] [ Indu Pokhriyal ] A.R.-cum-P.S. Court Master

¼ITEM NO.15 COURT NO.9 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSI.A. No.1 inPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil)....../2013(CC 16043/2013)(From the judgement and order dated 07/08/2012 in DBSAW No.904/2012of The HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR)GHISA RAM MALI & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS. Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for c/delay in refiling SLP and office report)Date: 09/09/2013 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FAKKIR MOHAMED IBRAHIM KALIFULLA (In Chambers)For Petitioner(s) Mr. Praveen Swarup,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R I have gone through the application seeking condonation of delay of 253 days in refiling the special leave petition. On being satisfied, the delay stands condoned subject to the petitioners' depositing a cost of Rs.500/- with the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee within a period of two weeks from today. [ Alka Dudeja ] [ Indu Pokhriyal ] A.R.-cum-P.S. Court Master

@ITEM NO.251 COURT NO.4 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil)....../2011 CC 17635/2011(From the judgement and order dated 29/04/2011 in DBCSA No.534/2009 of TheHIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR)SURESH CHAND JAIN Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)(Office report on default)Date: 12/08/2013 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.L. DATTU (In Chambers)For Petitioner(s) Mr. P.K. Jain,Adv. Mr.Saurabh Jain, Adv. Mr. S.P. Singh, Adv. Mr. A. Raj Narayanan, Adv. Mr. P.K. Goswami, Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Four weeks' time is allowed to the learned counsel for petitioner for filing requisite documents, if not, list before the Court. [ Usha Bhardwaj ] [ Vinod Kulvi ] A.R-cum-P.S. Asst. Registrar

üITEM NO.16 COURT NO.7 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A No. 1 in CIVIL APPEAL NO(s). 1038 OF 2012JITENDRA SINGH PARMAR & ORS. Appellant (s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for impleadment and office report)Date: 23/07/2013 This matter was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAMAJIT SEN (IN CHAMBERS)For Appellant(s) Mr. Devendra Jha,Adv. Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Heard. I.A. No.1 and I.A.No.2 - Applications for impleadment, for the reasons stated in the said applications, are allowed and parties are allowed to be impleaded, as prayed for. Two weeks' time is granted to file amended cause title.|(Mahabir Singh) | (Indu Pokhriyal) || Court Master | Court Master |

ITEM NO.14 COURT NO.4 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil)....../2012 (CC 22148/2012)(From the judgement and order dated 15/05/2012 in DBCSA No.1515/2011 of TheHIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR)BALDEV SINGH & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)With I.A.1 (C/delay in filing SLP and office report)Date: 03/01/2013 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SINGHVI HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE GYAN SUDHA MISRAFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Rakesh Dahiya, Adv. Mr.Gagan Deep Sharma, Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned. Leave granted. Tag with C.A.No.7906 of 2010. (Satish K.Yadav) (Phoolan Wati Arora) Court Master Court Master

˜ITEM NO.21 COURT NO.4 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil)....../2012 CC 20810/2012(From the judgement and order dated 16/05/2012 in DBCSA No.544/2012 inSBCWP No.1836/2010 of The HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR)PRADEEP KUMAR SHARMA & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)With I.A.1 (C/delay in filing SLP and office report)Date: 30/11/2012 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SINGHVI HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE GYAN SUDHA MISRAFor Petitioner(s) Mr.D.K.Thakur, Adv. Mr.Devendra Jha, Adv. Mr. Debasis Misra, Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned. Leave granted. Tag with C.A.No.7906 of 2010. (Satish K.Yadav) (Phoolan Wati Arora) Court Master Court Master

¤ITEM NO.6 COURT NO.5 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil)....../2012 (CC 4922/2012)(From the judgement and order dated 20/04/2011 in DBCSA No.7430/2009 inSBCWP No.7062/2008 of The HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR)SURENDRA SINGH NIRWAN Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)With I.A.1 (C/delay in filing SLP and c/delay in refiling SLP and officereport)Date: 21/09/2012 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SINGHVI HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE GYAN SUDHA MISRAFor Petitioner(s) Mr. P.K. Jain, Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned. Leave granted. The prayer for interim relief is rejected. The appointments made pursuant to the impugned Rules shallremain subject to final disposal of the appeals. Tag with C.A.No.3730 of 2011 and connected matters. (Satish K.Yadav) (Phoolan Wati Arora) Court Master Court Master

pITEM NO.14 COURT NO.5 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).23263-23271/2012(From the judgement and order dated 06/03/2012 in DBSWA No.75/2012,DBSWANo.77/2012,DBSWA No.78/2012,DBSWA No.79/2012,DBSWA No.99/2012,DBSWANo.100/2012,DBSWA No.101/2012,DBSWA No.102/2012,DBSWA No.103/2012 of TheHIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR)GAJENDRA GAUR & ORS.ETC.ETC. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)(With prayer for interim relief and office report )Date: 24/08/2012 These Petitions were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SINGHVI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYAFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Ajay Choudhary,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Leave granted. The prayer for interim relief is rejected. The appointments made pursuant to the impugned Rules shall remain subject to the disposal of the appeals. Tag with Civil Appeal No. 7906 of 2010 arising from S.L.P.(C) No.24321 of 2010. |(Parveen Kr.Chawla) | |(Phoolan Wati Arora) ||Court Master | |Court Master || | | |

ÈITEM NO.9 COURT NO.5 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil)....../2012 (CC 7437/2012)(From the judgement and order dated 13/12/2010 in DBSA No.517/2009of The HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR)SHYAM SUNDER SHARMA Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)With I.A.1 (C/delay in filing SLP and office report)Date: 04/05/2012 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SINGHVI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYAFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Sarad Kumar Singhania, Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned. Leave granted. Tag with C.A.No.3730 of 2011. (Satish K.Yadav) (Phoolan Wati Arora) Court Master Court Master

¾ITEM NO.23 COURT NO.6 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil)....../2012 CC 1818/2012(From the judgement and order dated 09/02/2011 in SBCWPNo.11465/2008,DBCSA No.1340/2011 of The HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN ATJAIPUR)MAHESH CHAND SAINI Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for c/delay in filing SLP,c/delay in refiling SLP andoffice report)Date: 06/02/2012 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SINGHVI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYAFor Petitioner(s) Mr. D.K. Thakur, Adv. Mr. Devendra Jha, Adv. Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv.(Not present)For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned. Leave granted. The prayer for interim relief is rejected. The appointments made pursuant to the impugned Rules shall remain subject to disposal of the appeal. Tag with Civil Appeal No. 7906 of 2010.(Parveen Kr.Chawla) (Vinod Kulvi) Court Master Court Master

&ITEM NO.30 COURT NO.6 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil)....../2012 (CC 1547/2012)(From the judgement and order dated 07/12/2010 in DBSAWNo.09596/2010 of The HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR)BHAGIRATH MAL THALOR Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)With I.A.1 (C/delay in filing SLP and office report)Date: 30/01/2012 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SINGHVI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYAFor Petitioner(s) Mr.S.K.Keshote, Sr.Adv. Mr. Sarad Kumar Singhania,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned. Leave granted. The appointments made pursuant to the impugned Rulesshall remain subject to disposal of the appeal. Tag with C.A.No.7906 of 2010. (Satish K.Yadav) (Phoolan Wati Arora) Court Master Court Master

ÆITEM NO.24 COURT NO.6 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil)....../2011 CC 22524/2011(From the judgement and order dated 07/12/2010 in SBCWPNo.5391/2008,DBCSA No.898/2009 of The HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN ATJAIPUR)JITENDRA SINGH PARMAR & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)With I.A. 1(C/delay in filing SLP and c/delay in refiling SLPand office report)Date: 24/01/2012 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SINGHVI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYAFor Petitioner(s) Mr. D.K. Thakur,Adv. Mr. D Jha,Adv. Mr. Sushil Kumar,Adv. Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay in filing the special leave petition is condoned. Leave granted. The prayer for interim relief is rejected. Tag with the Civil Appeal No.7906 of 2010 arising out of SLP(C)No.24321/2010 and other connected matters. (N.K. Goel) (VEENA KHERA)Court Master Court Master

îITEM NO.26 COURT NO.6 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil)....../2011 (CC 20739/2011)(From the judgement and order dated 13/12/2010 in DBSA No.194/2009of The HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR)SHIMBUDAYAL SHARMA Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)With I.A.1 (C/delay in filing SLP and office report)Date: 16/12/2011 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SINGHVI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYAFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Sarad Kumar Singhania,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned. Leave granted. Tag with civil appeal arising out of SLP(C)No.24321 of2010. The appointments made pursuant to the impugned Rulesshall remain subject to disposal of the appeals. (Satish K.Yadav) (Phoolan Wati Arora) Court Master Court Master

ôITEM NO.36 COURT NO.6 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).33725/2011(From the judgement and order dated 14/10/2011 in DBCSANo.1337/2011 of The HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR)RAMKARAN GURJAR Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)(With office report)Date: 16/12/2011 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SINGHVI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYAFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Sarad Kumar Singhania,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Leave granted. Tag with C.A.No.7906 of 2010. The appointments made pursuant to the impugned Rulesshall remain subject to disposal of the appeals. (Satish K.Yadav) (Phoolan Wati Arora) Court Master Court Master

|ITEM NO.30 COURT NO.6 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil)....../2011 (CC 20334/2011)(From the judgement and order dated 19/11/2010 in SBCWPNo.8026/2008,DBCSA No.7190/2009 of The HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN ATJAIPUR)SURAJ MAL JAT & ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)With I.A.1 (C/delay in filing SLP and c/delay in refiling SLP andoffice report)Date: 12/12/2011 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SINGHVI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYAFor Petitioner(s) Mr.D.K.Thakur, Adv. Mr. Debasis Misra, A.O.R.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned. Leave granted. Tag with C.A.No.7906 of 2010. The appointments made pursuant to the impugned Rulesshall remain subject to the disposal of the appeals. (Satish K.Yadav) (Phoolan Wati Arora) Court Master Court Master

¶ITEM NO.13 COURT NO.6 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil)....../2011 (CC 18808/2011)(From the judgment and order dated 28.04.2011 in DBSA(Writ)No.03953/2011 of The HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN ATJAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR)KRISHANKANT KALAVATIA Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)With I.A.1 (C/delay in filing SLP and office report)WITH S.L.P.(C)...CC NO. 18997 of 2011With I.A.1 (C/delay in filing SLP and office report)SLP(C) NO. 30952 of 2011(With office report)S.L.P.(C)...CC NO. 19053 of 2011With I.A.1 (C/delay in filing SLP and office report)Date: 02/12/2011 These Petitions were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SINGHVI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYAFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Sarad Kumar Singhania,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned. Leave granted. Tag with C.A.No.7906 of 2010. The appointments made pursuant to the impugned Rulesshall remain subject to disposal of the appeals. (Satish K.Yadav) (Phoolan Wati Arora) Court Master Court Master

lITEM NO.23 COURT NO.6 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).25555/2011(From the judgement and order(s) dated 26/04/2011 in DBCSANo.02012/2010 of The HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR)BHANA RAM Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for exemption from filing O.T. and permission tobring additional facts and documents on record and with prayer forinterim relief and office report)Date: 02/11/2011 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SINGHVI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYAFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Sarad Kumar Singhania,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Leave granted. The prayer for interim relief is rejected. The appointments made pursuant to the impugned Rules shall remain subject to disposal of the appeal. Tag with Civil Appeal No.7906 of 2010 arising from S.L.P.(civil) No.24321 of 2010.(Parveen Kr. Chawla) (Phoolan Wati Arora) Court Master Court Master

, 1ITEM NO.15 COURT NO.6 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil)....../2011 CC 6207/2011(From the judgement and order dated 22/10/2010 in DBCSA (W)No.07454/09, DBSAW No.7461/2009, DBSAW No.10989/2010,DBSAWNo.10990/2010,DBSAW No.10991/2010,DBSAW No.10992/2010,DBSAWNo.10993/2010, DBSAW No.10994/2010,DBSAW No.10995/2010,DBSAWNo.10996/2010,DBSAW No.10998/2010,DBSAW No.10999/2010 and DBSAWNo.11000/2010 of The HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR)RAMESHWAR PRASAD JAT & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for c/delay in filing SLP and office report ))Date: 14/10/2011 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SINGHVI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYAFor Petitioner(s) Mr. D.K.Thakur, Adv. Mr. D. Jha, Adv. Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv.(Not present)For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned. Leave granted. The prayer for interim relief is rejected. The appointments made pursuant to the impugned Rules shall remain subject to disposal of the appeals. Tag with Civil Appeal No. 7906 of 2010. 2(Parveen Kr. Chawla) (Phoolan Wati Arora) Court Master Court Master

\212ITEM NO.23 COURT NO.8 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil)....../2011 (CC 14038/2011)(From the judgement and order dated 21/05/2010 in DBSA No.471/200of The HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR)HARENDRA SINGH & ANR Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS Respondent(s)With I.A.1 (C/delay in filing SLP and office report)Date: 02/09/2011 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SINGHVI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.L. DATTUFor Petitioner(s) Mr. P.K. Jain,Adv. Mr.Saurabh Jain, Adv. Mr.S.P.Singh, Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned. Leave granted. Then prayer for interim relief is rejected. The appointments made pursuant to the impugned Rulesshall remain subject to disposal of the appeal. Tag with C.A.No.7906 of 2010. (Satish K.Yadav) (Phoolan Wati Arora) Court Master Court Master

vITEM NO.2 COURT NO.5 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSI.A. NO. 1 inPetition for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil)....../2011 CC 6207/2011(From the judgement and order dated 22/10/2010 in SBCWP No.1673/2009 & DBCSA No. 7454/2009 & DBSAW No. 7461/2009 & SBCWPNo. 7856/2009 & SBCWP No. 8333/2008 & DBCWP No. 8504/2008 &SBCWP No. 8557/2008 & DBSAW No. 10989/2010 & DBSAW No.10990/2010& DBAW No. 10991/2010 & DBCSA No. 10993/2010 & DBCSA No.10994/2010 & DBCAW No. 10995/2010 & DBCAW No. 10996/2010 & DBCSANo. 10998/2010 & DBCSA No. 10999/2010 & DBCSA No.11000/2010 &SBCWP No. 11328/2008 & SBCWP No. 11741/2008 & SBCWP No.11822/2008 & SBCWP No. 12192/2008 & SBCWP No. 12193/2008 & SBCWPNo. 12337/2008 & SBCWP No. 12708/2008 & SBCWP No. 12840/2008 ofThe HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR)RAMESHWAR PRASAD JAT & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)(Appln(s) for exemption from paying Court fee and office report)Date: 20/07/2011 This application was called on for hearingtoday.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.K. JAIN (IN CHAMBERS)For Petitioner(s) Mr. D.K. Thakur, Adv. Mr. D. Jha, Adv. Mr. Debasis Misra,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Exemption prayed for is declined. The deficiency in the court fee shall be made good within four weeks.(VINOD LAKHINA) (KUSUM GULATI) Court Master Court Master

ITEM NO.29 COURT NO.11 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).15573/2011(From the judgement and order dated 16/03/2011 in DBSAW No.2868/2011 in SBCWP No. 1972/2010 of The HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN ATJAIPUR)RAJENDRA KUMAR SAIN Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for exemption from filing O.T. and prayer for interimrelief and office report)Date: 06/07/2011 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SINGHVI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASOK KUMAR GANGULYFor Petitioner(s) Ms. _______, Adv.* Ms. Pratibha Jain, A.O.R.[Not present]For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Leave granted. The prayer for interim relief is rejected. The appointments made pursuant to the impugned Rules shall remain subject to disposal of the appeal. (A.D. Sharma) (Phoolan Wati Arora) Court Master Court MasterP.S.: The learned counsel, who appeared for the petitioner, did notgive appearance slip.

ÒITEM NO.18 COURT NO.11 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).14841/2011(From the judgement and order dated 13/12/2010 in DBSAW No.198/2009 of The HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR)MADHUSUDAN SHARMA Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for permission to place addl. documents on recordand with prayer for interim relief and office report)WITH SLP(C) NO. 14976 of 2011(With appln(s) for permission to bring addl. facts and documents onrecord and with prayer for interim relief and office report)SLP(C) NO. 15153 of 2011(With appln(s) for permission to bring addl. facts and documents onrecord and with prayer for interim relief and office report)Date: 05/07/2011 These Petitions were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SINGHVI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASOK KUMAR GANGULYFor Petitioner(s) Mr.S.K.Keshote, Sr.Adv. Mr. Sarad Kumar Singhania,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Leave granted. The prayer for interim relief is rejected. The appointments made pursuant to the impugned Rulesshall remain subject to disposal of the appeals. Tag with C.A.No.3730 of 2011. (Satish K.Yadav) (Phoolan Wati Arora) Court Master Court Master

ôITEM NO.31 COURT NO.11 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).13618/2011(From the judgement and order dated 04/02/2011 in DBCSA No.1061/2011 in SBCWP No. 11329/2008 of The HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN ATJAIPUR)ANUPAM PANCH Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for exemption from filing O.T. and prayer for interimrelief and office report ))Date: 13/05/2011 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SINGHVI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASOK KUMAR GANGULYFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Anil Kumar Verma,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Leave granted. The prayer for interim relief is rejected. The appointments made pursuant to the impugned Rules shall remain subject to disposal of the appeal. (A.D. Sharma) (Phoolan Wati Arora) Court Master Court Master

ÎITEM NO.17 COURT NO.10 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).11060/2011(From the judgement and order dated 21/12/2010 in DBSAW No.7457/2009 in SBCWP No. 8396/2008 of The HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN ATJAIPUR)MANOJ KUMAR SHARMA Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for exemption from filing O.T.,permission to placeaddl. documents on record and prayer for interim relief and officereport)Date: 12/05/2011 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SINGHVI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASOK KUMAR GANGULYFor Petitioner(s) Mr. S.K. Keshote, Sr.Adv. Mr. Sarad Kumar Singhania,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Leave granted. The prayer for interim relief is rejected. The appointments made pursuant to the impugned Rules shall remain subject to disposal of the appeal. (A.D. Sharma) (Phoolan Wati Arora) Court Master Court Master

ÆITEM NO.23 Court No.10 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).12886/2011(From the judgement and order dated 09/02/2011 in DBCSA No. 168/2011 of The HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR)MAMTA BANSAL & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for exemption from filing O.T. and prayer for interim relief and office report ))Date: 11/05/2011 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SINGHVI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASOK KUMAR GANGULYFor Petitioner(s) Mr.Satish Chand Gupta, Adv. Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Goyal,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Leave granted. The prayer for interim relief is rejected. The appointments made pursuant to the impugned Rules shall remain subject to the disposal of the appeal. Tag with Civil Appeal No. 7906 of 2010 and Civil Appeal arising out of SLP(C) No.....CC No. 17903 of 2010. (Shashi Sareen) (Phoolan Wati Arora) Court Master Court Master

TITEM NO.12 COURT NO.11 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil)....../2011 CC 6880/2011(From the judgement and order dated 13/12/2010 in DBSA No.3300/2008 of The HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR)MANSUKH RAY SHARMA Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)IA 1 (C/delay in filing SLP and office report)WITHSLP(C) NO. 10969 of 2011IA 1 (C/delay in filing SLP and office report)SLP(C) NO. 11009 of 2011IA 1 (C/delay in filing SLP and office report)Date: 25/04/2011 These Petitions were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SINGHVI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASOK KUMAR GANGULYFor Petitioner(s) Mr. S.K. Keshote, Sr.Adv. Mr. Sarad Kumar Singhania,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R On the oral request made by Shri S.K. Keshote, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners, his assisting counsel is permitted to file "List of Dates and Synopsis". Delay condoned. Leave granted. The prayer for interim relief is rejected. The appointments made pursuant to the impugned Rules shall remain subject to disposal of the appeals. Tag with civil appeal arising out of SLP(C)No.24321 of 2010.(A.D. Sharma) (Phoolan Wati Arora) Court Master Court Master

òITEM NO.7 COURT NO.6 SECTION XVII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSCIVIL APPEAL NO(s). D4688 OF 2011(FOR PREL. HEARING)ORISSA ELECT.REGUL.COMMN. Appellant (s) VERSUSWESTERN ELECT.SUP.CO.OF ORISSA LTD.& ORS Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for condonation of delay in filing appeal andoffice report)Date: 21/04/2011 This Appeal was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MARKANDEY KATJU HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE GYAN SUDHA MISRAFor Petitioner(s) Mr. K.V. Vishwanathan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Samareshwar Mohanty, Adv. Mr. Rutwik Panda,Adv.For Respondent(s) Mr. Shiv Kumar Suri,Adv. Mr. Hasan Murtaza, Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned. Admitted. As requested by learned counsel appearing for the appellant, the names of proforma respondents are deleted from the array of parties at the risk of the appellant. Issue notice to contesting respondents only. Tag with Civil Appeal No. 414 of 2007 etc. etc. ( Rajesh Dham ) ( Indu Satija ) Court Master Court Master

FITEM NO.19 COURT NO.11 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil)....../2011 CC 4883/2011(From the judgement and order dated 06/08/2010 in DBCSA No.8927/2009in SBCWP No. 7999/2008 of The HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR)GOVIND NARAYAN Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)IA 1 (C/delay in filing SLP and office report)WITHSLP(C) NO. 7546-7548 of 2011(With office report)S.L.P.(C)...CC NO. 5084-5086 of 2011IA 1-3 (c/delay in filing SLP, c/delay in refiling SLP and officereport)SLP(C) NO. 7937-7938 of 2011(With office report)Date: 28/03/2011 These Petitions were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SINGHVI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASOK KUMAR GANGULYFor Petitioner(s) Mr. D.K. Thakur,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay in filing the special leave petitions is condoned. Leave granted. The prayer for interim relief is rejected. Tag with the Civil Appeal No.7906 of 2010 arising out of SLP(C)No.24321/2010 and other connected matters.(A.D. Sharma) (Phoolan Wati Arora) Court Master Court Master

ØITEM NO.7 COURT NO.11 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil)....../2010 CC 17903/2010(From the judgement and order dated 21/05/2010 in DBSA No. 418/2009of The HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR)SARLA SHARMA Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)IA 1 (C/delay in filing SLP and office report)Date: 03/12/2010 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SINGHVI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASOK KUMAR GANGULYFor Petitioner(s) Ms. Christi Jain,Adv. Mr. Manish Sharma, Adv. Mr. Anil Kr. Verma, Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned. Leave granted. The prayer for interim relief is rejected. The appointments made pursuant to the impugned Rules shall remain subject to disposal of the appeal. Tag with Civil Appeal No.7906/2010 (arising out of SLP(C)No.24321/2010).(A.D. Sharma) (Phoolan Wati Arora) Court Master Court Master

°ITEM NO.31 COURT NO.11 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).27771-27774/2010(From the judgement and order dated 21/05/2010 in DBSA No. 434/2009& DBSA No. 358/2009 & DBSA No. 419/2009 & DBSA No. 468/2009 of TheHIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR)BRIJESH KUMAR & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for exemption from filing O.T. and with prayer forinterim relief and office report)Date: 19/10/2010 These Petitions were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SINGHVI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASOK KUMAR GANGULYFor Petitioner(s) Mr.S.K.Jain, Adv. Mr.Puneet Jain, Adv. Ms. Pratibha Jain,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Leave granted. Tag with C.A.No.7906 of 2010.(Satish K.Yadav) (Phoolan Wati Arora) Court Master Court Master

þITEM NO.22 COURT NO.11 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil)....../2010 CC 14353/2010(From the judgement and order dated 21/05/2010 in DBCSA No.313/2009 of The HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR)DEVI PRASAD & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)IA 1 (C/delay in filing SLP and office report)Date: 20/09/2010 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SINGHVI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASOK KUMAR GANGULYFor Petitioner(s) Mr. P.K. Jain,Adv. Mr. Arun Chaudhary, Adv. Mr. Amit Kr. Chwawla, Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Learned counsel for the petitioners says that names of respondent nos.5 to 10 be deleted from the array of parties. The request of the learned counsel is accepted and the names of respondent nos.5 to 10 are deleted from the array of parties subject to just exception. Delay condoned. Leave granted. The prayer for interim relief is rejected. The appointments made pursuant to the impugned Rules shall remain subject to disposal of the appeal. Tag with C.A. No.7906 of 2010 (arising out of SLP(C)No.24321/2010). (A.D. Sharma) (Phoolan Wati Arora) Court Master Court Master

\200ITEM NO.17 COURT NO.11 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).24321/2010(From the judgement and order dated 21/05/2010 in DBSAW No.402/2009 of The HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR)MAHESH CHAND BARETH & ANR Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)Date: 06/09/2010 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SINGHVI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASOK KUMAR GANGULYFor Petitioner(s) Mr. S.K. Keshote, Sr.Adv. Mr. Sarad Kumar Singhania,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Leave granted. The prayer for interim relief is rejected. The appointments made pursuant to the impugned Rules shall remain subject to disposal of the appeal. (A.D. Sharma) (Phoolan Wati Arora) Court Master Court Master

MANSUKH RAY SHARMA v. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN THROUGH CHIEF SECRETARY

Full Judgment Text

Search This Case

Supreme Court Resources

High Court Case Status