UOI v. P.K DEB

1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).6394-6395 OF 2012 UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Appellant(s) VERSUS HARI SHANKAR DIXIT Respondent(s) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 6575 OF 2012 WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 5133 OF 2013 WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 6270 OF 2013 WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 6412 OF 2014 WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 8155 OF 2016 O R D E R Heard Mrs. Pinky Anand, learned Additional Solicitor General (ASG) appearing for the Union of India, which is appellant in many of these batch of cases and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents. 2. The main point under issue and which is common to all these appeals is whether the appellants were required to supply a copy of the opinion of the Union Public Service Commission (in short 'the

2 Commission') to the charged employees/officers before imposing penalty. In the present case, the said legal issue is said to have been settled by a judgment of this Court in the case of Union of India vs. R.P. Singh (2014) 7 SCC 340 rendered by the Division Bench. As per that judgment, it is not enough to supply the copy of the Commission's advice along with the order of punishment as is required under the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 (in short 'the 1965 Rules') but rather it should be supplied in advance to solicit comments from the delinquent officers and thereafter only final decision should be taken. 3. On behalf of the appellants, an attempt has been made to assail the view taken in the aforesaid judgment mainly on the ground that the implications of proviso to Article 311 (2) of the Constitution post 42 nd Amendment in 1976 has not been taken into account. It was also submitted that the Rules governing the employees/officers such as Rule 28 of the 1965 Rules in the case of Railway employees; and Rule 32 of the 1965 Rules in case of employees governed by the 1965 Rules, require supply of copy

3 of the Commission's opinion only along with the final order of penalty and such Rules have not been challenged so far. 4. Learned Additional Solicitor General has also submitted that paras 26 to 28 of the Constitution Bench Judgment of this Court in the case of Managing Director, ECIL, Hyderabad and Others vs. B. Karunakar and Ors. (1993) 4 SCC 727 has not been properly interpreted upon in the case of R.P. Singh ( supra ) and in fact that judgment apart from dealing with the rights of the employees at the first stage of disciplinary inquiry leading to a finding whether the charges stood proved or not, also dealt with the effect of 42 nd Amendment and held that similar right exercisable at the second stage was taken away. It was submitted that till the first stage, it was incumbent for the authorities to supply copy of the inquiry report but at the second stage no opportunity is to be given since the constitutional amendment does not require the delinquent employees to be associated with the award of punishment and accordingly the opportunity of representation has been dispensed with. In respect of consequence of

4 the 42 nd Amendment of the Constitution, the Constitution Bench judgment in fact provides some clarification which favours the appellants' case. In support of the contention, reliance was placed upon Para 28 of the Constitution Bench's judgment which reads as follows: “28.The position in law can also be looked at from a slightly different angle. Article 311(2) says that the employee shall be given a "reasonable opportunity of being heard in respect of the charges against him". The findings on the charges given by a third person like the inquiry Officer, particularly when they are not borne out by the evidence or are arrived at by overlooking the evidence or misconstruing it, could themselves constitute new unwarranted imputations. What is further, when the proviso to the said Article states that "where it is proposed after such inquiry to impose upon him any such penalty such penalty may be imposed on the basis of the evidence adduced during such inquiry and it shall not be necessary to give such person any opportunity of making representation on the penalty proposed", it in effect accepts two successive stages of differing scope. Since the penalty is to be proposed after the inquiry, which inquiry in effect is to be carried out by the disciplinary authority (the Inquiry Officer being only his delegate appointed to hold the inquiry and to assist him), the employee's reply to the inquiry officer's report and consideration of such reply by the disciplinary authority also constitute an integral part of such inquiry. The second stage follows the inquiry so carried out and it consists of the issuance of the notice to show cause against the proposed penalty and of considering the reply to the notice and deciding upon the penalty. What is dispensed with is the opportunity of making representation on the penalty proposed and not of opportunity of making representation on the report of the inquiry officer. The

5 latter right was always there. But before the 42 nd Amendment of the Constitution, the point of time at which it was to be exercised had stood deferred till the second stage viz., the stage of considering the penalty. Till that time, the conclusions that the disciplinary authority might have arrived at both with regard to the guilt of the employee and the penalty to be imposed were only tentative. All that has happened after the 42 nd Amendment of the Constitution is to advance the point of time at which the representation of the employee against the inquiry Officer's report would be considered. Now, the disciplinary authority has to consider the representation of the employee against the report before it arrives at its conclusion with regard to his guilt or innocence of the charges.” 5 . On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents have taken us through the opinion rendered by the Commission in more than one matter to show that the opinion has been rendered by UPSC/CVC, not only in respect of the punishment but also on the issue as to whether the materials justified holding the charged officers guilty or not. On that basis, it has been submitted that opinion of the Commission virtually stands on same footing as the report of the inquiry officer because the final order of punishment also reflects the fact that the disciplinary authority has accepted the opinion of the Commission for holding the charged officers guilty as well as for awarding

6 the punishment as per the opinion of the Commission. In fact, the submission is that there is over-lapping of stage I and stage II in actual practice and hence the same principles of natural justice which required supply of a copy of the inquiry report are attracted warranting supply of a copy of the opinion of the Commission. It was submitted that since the opinion of the Commission was not furnished to the delinquent officers, High Court rightly directed the authorities to furnish copy of the report of CVC/UPSC and proceed with the enquiry from stage of making available copy of the report of CVC/UPSC to the respondents and pass fresh orders in accordance with law. 6. We have carefully considered the submissions. 7. These matters have remained pending for several years at various stages and the directions are only to re-consider the order of punishment after supplying to the concerned employees a copy of the CVC/UPSC’s advice/ opinion. 8. In the larger interest of justice, we do not want the respondents in these appeals to

7 suffer the agony of further delay and hence while leaving the questions of law open, we do not propose to pass any order interfering with the impugned order in these cases. As a result, the appeals are dismissed but without any order as to costs. It is clarified that this order has been rendered in the peculiar facts of the cases on hand. 9. The question of law raised doubting the correctness of RP Singh’s case (2014) 7 SCC 340 and the contention that there was no thread bare analysis of proviso to Article 311(2) of the Constitution and the request for referring the matter to a larger Bench is left open to be addressed in any other appropriate matter. 10. All the pending applications/petitions shall now stand disposed of. …. .............J (SHIVA KIRTI SINGH) …..............J (R. BANUMATHI) NEW DELHI September 28, 2016.

8 ITEM NO.105 COURT NO.12 SECTION IX 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). 6394-6395/2012 UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Appellant(s) VERSUS HARI SHANKAR DIXIT Respondent(s) WITH C.A. No. 6575/2012 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 5133/2013 (With Interim Relief and Office Report) C.A. No. 6270/2013 SLP(C) No. 22211/2013 (With Office Report) SLP(C) No. 26024/2013 SLP(C) No. 32344/2013 (With appln.(s) for c/delay in filing process fee and Office Report) C.A. No. 6412/2014 SLP(C) No. 10848/2014 (With Office Report) S.L.P.(C)...CC No. 15844/2014 (With appln.(s) for c/delay in filing SLP and Office Report) C.A. No. 8155/2016 Date : 28/09/2016 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVA KIRTI SINGH HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI

9 For Appellant(s) Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma,Adv. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal,Adv. Ms. Pinky Anand, ASG Mr. D.N. Goburdhun, Adv. Mr. R. Balasubramaniun, Adv. Ms. Manita Verma, Adv. Ms. Snidha Verma, Adv. Ms. Kritika Sachdeva, Adv. Ms. Somya Rathore, Adv. Mr. Pranav Kumar, Adv. Mr. Raj Bahadur Yadav, Adv. Ms. Niranjana Singh, Adv. Ms. Abha R. Sharma, Adv. Mr. B. Krishna Prasad,Adv. Mr. D. S. Mahra,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Anupam Lal Das,Adv. Mr. Sahil Monga, Adv. Mr. Anirudh Singh, Adv. Ms. Priyanka Sony, Adv. for Mrs Rani Chhabra,Adv. Mr. Anand Varma,Adv. Mr. Kaustubh Prakash, Adv. Mr. C. K. Rai,Adv. Mrs. Rekha Palli, Sr. Adv. Mr. Deepak Goel,Adv. Ms. Ankita Patnaik, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Palli, Adv. Mr. Anant Vijay Palli, Adv. Mr. Ajit Sharma,Adv. Mr. Bijan Kumar Ghosh,Adv. Mrs. Santosh Singh,Adv. Caveator-in-person

10 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned. Heard Mrs. Pinky Anand, learned Additional Solicitor General (ASG) appearing for the Union of India, which is appellant in many of these batch of cases and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents. Special leave petitions are dismissed. Appeals are dismissed in terms of the signed order . All the pending applications/petitions shall now stand disposed of. (NEELAM GULATI) COURT MASTER (SUKHBIR PAUL KAUR) AR cum PS (Signed order in C.A. 6394-95 and 6575 of 2012, 5133 and 6270 of 2013, CA. 6412/2014 and CA 8155 of 2016)

tf1IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTIONCIVIL APPEAL NO(S).6394-6395 OF 2012UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Appellant(s) VERSUSHARI SHANKAR DIXIT Respondent(s)WITHCIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 6575 OF 2012WITHCIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 5133 OF 2013WITHCIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 6270 OF 2013 WITHCIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 6412 OF 2014 WITHCIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 8155 OF 2016O R D E R Heard Mrs. Pinky Anand, learned AdditionalSolicitor General (ASG) appearing for the Union ofIndia, which is appellant in many of these batch ofcases and the learned counsel appearing for therespondents.2. The main point under issue and which is commonto all these appeals is whether the appellants wererequired to supply a copy of the opinion of theUnion Public Service Commission (in short 'the2Commission') to the charged employees/officersbefore imposing penalty. In the present case, thesaid legal issue is said to have been settled by ajudgment of this Court in the case of Union ofIndia vs. R.P. Singh (2014) 7 SCC 340 rendered bythe Division Bench. As per that judgment, it is notenough to supply the copy of the Commission's advicealong with the order of punishment as is requiredunder the Central Civil Services (Classification,Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 (in short 'the 1965Rules') but rather it should be supplied in advanceto solicit comments from the delinquent officers andthereafter only final decision should be taken.3. On behalf of the appellants, an attempt hasbeen made to assail the view taken in the aforesaidjudgment mainly on the ground that the implicationsof proviso to Article 311 (2) of the Constitutionpost 42 nd Amendment in 1976 has not been taken intoaccount. It was also submitted that the Rulesgoverning the employees/officers such as Rule 28 ofthe 1965 Rules in the case of Railway employees; andRule 32 of the 1965 Rules in case of employeesgoverned by the 1965 Rules, require supply of copy3of the Commission's opinion only along with thefinal order of penalty and such Rules have not beenchallenged so far.4. Learned Additional Solicitor General has alsosubmitted that paras 26 to 28 of the ConstitutionBench Judgment of this Court in the case ofManaging Director, ECIL, Hyderabad and Others vs.B. Karunakar and Ors. (1993) 4 SCC 727 has not beenproperly interpreted upon in the case of R.P. Singh( supra ) and in fact that judgment apart from dealingwith the rights of the employees at the first stageof disciplinary inquiry leading to a finding whetherthe charges stood proved or not, also dealt with theeffect of 42 nd

Amendment and held that similar rightexercisable at the second stage was taken away. Itwas submitted that till the first stage, it wasincumbent for the authorities to supply copy of theinquiry report but at the second stage noopportunity is to be given since the constitutionalamendment does not require the delinquent employeesto be associated with the award of punishment andaccordingly the opportunity of representation hasbeen dispensed with. In respect of consequence of4the 42 nd Amendment of the Constitution, theConstitution Bench judgment in fact provides someclarification which favours the appellants' case.In support of the contention, reliance was placedupon Para 28 of the Constitution Bench's judgmentwhich reads as follows:⬠S28.The position in law can also belooked at from a slightly different angle.Article 311(2) says that the employee shallbe given a "reasonable opportunity of beingheard in respect of the charges against him".The findings on the charges given by a thirdperson like the inquiry Officer, particularlywhen they are not borne out by the evidenceor are arrived at by overlooking the evidenceor misconstruing it, could themselvesconstitute new unwarranted imputations. Whatis further, when the proviso to the saidArticle states that "where it is proposedafter such inquiry to impose upon him anysuch penalty such penalty may be imposed onthe basis of the evidence adduced during suchinquiry and it shall not be necessary to givesuch person any opportunity of makingrepresentation on the penalty proposed", itin effect accepts two successive stages ofdiffering scope. Since the penalty is to beproposed after the inquiry, which inquiry ineffect is to be carried out by thedisciplinary authority (the Inquiry Officerbeing only his delegate appointed to hold theinquiry and to assist him), the employee'sreply to the inquiry officer's report andconsideration of such reply by thedisciplinary authority also constitute anintegral part of such inquiry. The secondstage follows the inquiry so carried out andit consists of the issuance of the notice toshow cause against the proposed penalty andof considering the reply to the notice anddeciding upon the penalty. What is dispensedwith is the opportunity of makingrepresentation on the penalty proposed andnot of opportunity of making representationon the report of the inquiry officer. The5latter right was always there. But before the42 nd Amendment of the Constitution, the pointof time at which it was to be exercised hadstood deferred till the second stage viz.,the stage of considering the penalty. Tillthat time, the conclusions that thedisciplinary authority might have arrived atboth with regard to the guilt of the employee

and the penalty to be imposed were onlytentative. All that has happened after the42 nd Amendment of the Constitution is toadvance the point of time at which therepresentation of the employee against theinquiry Officer's report would be considered.Now, the disciplinary authority has toconsider the representation of the employeeagainst the report before it arrives at itsconclusion with regard to his guilt orinnocence of the charges.⬠\2355 . On the other hand, learned counsel for therespondents have taken us through the opinionrendered by the Commission in more than one matterto show that the opinion has been rendered byUPSC/CVC, not only in respect of the punishment butalso on the issue as to whether the materialsjustified holding the charged officers guilty ornot. On that basis, it has been submitted thatopinion of the Commission virtually stands on samefooting as the report of the inquiry officerbecause the final order of punishment also reflectsthe fact that the disciplinary authority hasaccepted the opinion of the Commission for holdingthe charged officers guilty as well as for awarding6the punishment as per the opinion of theCommission. In fact, the submission is that thereis over-lapping of stage I and stage II in actualpractice and hence the same principles of naturaljustice which required supply of a copy of theinquiry report are attracted warranting supply of acopy of the opinion of the Commission. It wassubmitted that since the opinion of the Commissionwas not furnished to the delinquent officers, HighCourt rightly directed the authorities to furnishcopy of the report of CVC/UPSC and proceed with theenquiry from stage of making available copy of thereport of CVC/UPSC to the respondents and passfresh orders in accordance with law.6. We have carefully considered the submissions.7. These matters have remained pending forseveral years at various stages and thedirections are only to re-consider the order ofpunishment after supplying to the concernedemployees a copy of the CVC/UPSC⬠"!s advice/opinion.8. In the larger interest of justice, we donot want the respondents in these appeals to7suffer the agony of further delay and hencewhile leaving the questions of law open, we donot propose to pass any order interfering withthe impugned order in these cases. As a result,the appeals are dismissed but without any orderas to costs. It is clarified that this orderhas been rendered in the peculiar facts of thecases on hand. 9. The question of law raised doubting thecorrectness of RP Singh⬠"!s case (2014) 7 SCC 340and the contention that there was no thread bareanalysis of proviso to Article 311(2) of theConstitution and the request for referring thematter to a larger Bench is left open to beaddressed in any other appropriate matter. 10. All the pending applications/petitions

shall now stand disposed of.⬠¦. .............J (SHIVA KIRTI SINGH)⬠¦..............J(R. BANUMATHI)NEW DELHISeptember 28, 2016.8ITEM NO.105 COURT NO.12 SECTION IX 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). 6394-6395/2012UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Appellant(s) VERSUSHARI SHANKAR DIXIT Respondent(s)WITHC.A. No. 6575/2012(With Office Report) C.A. No. 5133/2013(With Interim Relief and Office Report) C.A. No. 6270/2013 SLP(C) No. 22211/2013(With Office Report) SLP(C) No. 26024/2013 SLP(C) No. 32344/2013(With appln.(s) for c/delay in filing process fee and Office Report) C.A. No. 6412/2014 SLP(C) No. 10848/2014(With Office Report) S.L.P.(C)...CC No. 15844/2014(With appln.(s) for c/delay in filing SLP and Office Report) C.A. No. 8155/2016 Date : 28/09/2016 These matters were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVA KIRTI SINGH HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI9For Appellant(s) Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma,Adv. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal,Adv. Ms. Pinky Anand, ASG Mr. D.N. Goburdhun, Adv. Mr. R. Balasubramaniun, Adv. Ms. Manita Verma, Adv. Ms. Snidha Verma, Adv. Ms. Kritika Sachdeva, Adv. Ms. Somya Rathore, Adv. Mr. Pranav Kumar, Adv. Mr. Raj Bahadur Yadav, Adv. Ms. Niranjana Singh, Adv. Ms. Abha R. Sharma, Adv. Mr. B. Krishna Prasad,Adv. Mr. D. S. Mahra,Adv.For Respondent(s) Mr. Anupam Lal Das,Adv. Mr. Sahil Monga, Adv. Mr. Anirudh Singh, Adv. Ms. Priyanka Sony, Adv. for Mrs Rani Chhabra,Adv. Mr. Anand Varma,Adv. Mr. Kaustubh Prakash, Adv. Mr. C. K. Rai,Adv. Mrs. Rekha Palli, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Deepak Goel,Adv. Ms. Ankita Patnaik, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Palli, Adv. Mr. Anant Vijay Palli, Adv. Mr. Ajit Sharma,Adv. Mr. Bijan Kumar Ghosh,Adv. Mrs. Santosh Singh,Adv. Caveator-in-person10 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RDelay condoned.Heard Mrs. Pinky Anand, learned Additional Solicitor General (ASG) appearing for the Union of India, which is appellant in many of these batch of cases and the learnedcounsel appearing for the respondents.Special leave petitions are dismissed. Appeals are dismissed in terms of the signed order .All the pending applications/petitions shall now standdisposed of. (NEELAM GULATI) COURT MASTER (SUKHBIR PAUL KAUR) AR cum PS(Signed order in C.A. 6394-95 and 6575 of 2012, 5133 and 6270 of 2013, CA. 6412/2014 and CA 8155 of 2016)

1 ITEM NO.106 COURT NO.13 SECTION IX 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). 6394-6395/2012 UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Appellant(s) VERSUS HARI SHANKAR DIXIT Respondent(s) WITH C.A. No. 6575/2012 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 5133/2013 (With Interim Relief and Office Report) C.A. No. 6270/2013 (With Interim Relief and Office Report) SLP(C) No. 22211/2013 (With Office Report) SLP(C) No. 26024/2013 Office Report) SLP(C) No. 32344/2013 (With (With appln.(s) for c/delay in filing process fee/spare copies and Office Report) C.A. No. 6412/2014 (With Office Report) SLP(C) No. 10848/2014 (With Office Report) S.L.P.(C).../2016 (CC No. 15844/2014) (With (With appln.(s) for early hearing and appln.(s) for c/delay in filing SLP and Office Report) C.A. No. 8155/2016 (With Office Report) Date : 15/09/2016 These appeals were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVA KIRTI SINGH HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI

2 For Appellant(s) Ms. Niranjana Singh,Adv. Ms. Abha R.Sharma,Adv. Ms. Manita Verma,Adv. Ms. R. Bala,Adv. Mr. Raj Bahadur,Adv. Mr. B. Krishna Prasad,Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma,Adv. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal,Adv. Mr. D. S. Mahra,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Anupam Lal Das,Adv. Mrs Rani Chhabra,Adv. Ms. Priyanka S.Adv. Mr. C. K. Rai,Adv. Mrs. Rekha Palli,Sr.Adv. Ms. Punam Singh,Adv. Mr. Nikhil Palli,Adv. Mr. Deepak Goel,Adv. Mr. Ajit Sharma,Adv. Mr. Bijan Kumar Ghosh,Adv. Mrs. Santosh Singh,Adv. Caveator-in-person UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List on 28 th September, 2016. No further adjournment is allowed in favour of the appellants. (Madhu Bala) (Madhu Narula) Court Master Court Master

SECTION XI                             Listed On : 15.09.2016           IN THE SUPREME COURT OF  INDIA        Court No. : 13                          CIVIL APPELLATE  JURISDICTION             Item No.   : 106 INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NO. 1 (Application for Condonation of Delay in filing the Special Leave Petition) IN PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL (CIVIL) CC... NO. 15844 OF 2014 WITH PRAYER FOR INTERIM RELIEF   UNION OF INDIA & ORS.     ...PETITIONER(S)        VERSUS BASANT                     ...RESPONDENT(S) OFFICE REPORT The matter above mentioned alongwith connected matters was listed before   the Hon'ble Court on 26.11.2015, when the Court was pleased to pass the   following order: “ List after four weeks. ” It is submitted that Notice of hearing to the Caveator­in­person has been   issued at two different addresses, i.e., one given in the SLP cause title and the   other one which is mentioned on the attested copies of Voter Identity Card,   Aadhar Card and Pensioners Identity Card given by the Caveator­in­person along   with the  interlocutory application.  As per the Postal Track Report, the Notice of   hearing has been delivered at Basharatpur S.O. i.e., the address now given by the   Caveator­in­person on the documents given along with the interlocutory   application which is different from the address given in SLP but Caveator­in­ person has not got it changed on the record of the SLP. However service of Notice   of hearing has been effected on him. The matter above mentioned is listed before the Hon'ble Court with this   Report. Dated this the 14 th  day of September, 2016. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to:   Mr. S.N. Terdal , Advocate Mr. Basant, Respondent­in­Person s2 ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

\2301ITEM NO.106 COURT NO.13 SECTION IX 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). 6394-6395/2012UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Appellant(s) VERSUSHARI SHANKAR DIXIT Respondent(s)WITHC.A. No. 6575/2012(With Office Report)C.A. No. 5133/2013(With Interim Relief and Office Report)C.A. No. 6270/2013(With Interim Relief and Office Report)SLP(C) No. 22211/2013(With Office Report)SLP(C) No. 26024/2013Office Report)SLP(C) No. 32344/2013(With (With appln.(s) for c/delay in filing process fee/sparecopies and Office Report)C.A. No. 6412/2014(With Office Report)SLP(C) No. 10848/2014(With Office Report)S.L.P.(C).../2016 (CC No. 15844/2014)(With (With appln.(s) for early hearing and appln.(s) for c/delay in filing SLP and Office Report)C.A. No. 8155/2016(With Office Report) Date : 15/09/2016 These appeals were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVA KIRTI SINGH HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI2For Appellant(s) Ms. Niranjana Singh,Adv.Ms. Abha R.Sharma,Adv.Ms. Manita Verma,Adv.Ms. R. Bala,Adv.Mr. Raj Bahadur,Adv.Mr. B. Krishna Prasad,Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma,Adv. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal,Adv. Mr. D. S. Mahra,Adv.For Respondent(s) Mr. Anupam Lal Das,Adv. Mrs Rani Chhabra,Adv.Ms. Priyanka S.Adv. Mr. C. K. Rai,Adv. Mrs. Rekha Palli,Sr.Adv.Ms. Punam Singh,Adv.Mr. Nikhil Palli,Adv.Mr. Deepak Goel,Adv. Mr. Ajit Sharma,Adv. Mr. Bijan Kumar Ghosh,Adv. Mrs. Santosh Singh,Adv. Caveator-in-person UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R

List on 28 th September, 2016.No further adjournment is allowed in favour ofthe appellants. (Madhu Bala) (Madhu Narula) Court Master Court Master

ITEM NO.24 COURT NO.5 SECTION XI S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C)......CC No(s). 14557/2016 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 18/04/2015 in WP No. 502/2015 passed by the High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench) UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS DAYA RAM AND ANR Respondent(s) (with appln. (s) for c/delay in filing SLP and c/delay in refiling SLP and office report) Date : 12/08/2016 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J. CHELAMESWAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE For Petitioner(s) Mr. A.R. Nadkarni, ASG Ms. Alka Agrawal, Adv. Ms. Rukhsana Choudhury, Adv. Mr. Raj Bahadur Singh, Adv. Mr. K.P.K. Pillai, Adv. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned. Leave granted. Tag with Civil Appeal Nos. 6394-6395 of 2012 arising out of SLP(C) Nos. 34343-44 of 2011. (DEEPAK MANSUKHANI) (RAJINDER KAUR) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER

SECTION XI                 LISTED ON   :12.08.2016       IN THE SUPREME COURT OF  INDIA      Court No.     : 5                          CIVIL APPELLATE  JURISDICTION         Item No.       :  24       INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NOS. 1 & 2 (Application for Condonation of Delay in filing & refiling the Special Leave Petition) IN PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL(CIVIL) NO. CC... 14557 OF 2016 WITH PRAYER FOR INTERIM RELIEF    UNION OF INDIA & ORS.            ...PETITIONER(s)    VERSUS DAYA RAM AND ANR.          ...RESPONDENT(s) OFFICE REPORT The Special Leave Petition above­mentioned has been filed against the   Judgment and Order dated 18.04.2015 passed by the High Court of Judicature at   Allahabad, Lucknow Bench, Lucknow in W.P. No. 502(S/B) of 2015. It is submitted that there is a delay of 129 days in filing and 126 days in   refiling the Special Leave Petition and counsel has filed an application for   condonation of delay to condone the said delay. It is further submitted that Leave in SLP(C) No. 34343­44 of 2011 arising out   of similar issue was granted on 06.09.2012 by Hon'ble Court. The same is registered   as Civil Appeal No. 6394­95 of 2012 and is pending. (Copy of order dated   06.09.2012 is enclosed). The matter above­mentioned is listed before the Hon'ble Court with this office   report. Dated this the 09 th   day of August, 2016. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to:      Mr. S.N. Terdal, Advocate.    ASSISTANT REGISTRAR   s2

ITEM NO.24 COURT NO.5 SECTION XI 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 (C)......CC No(s). 14557/2016(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 18/04/2015in WP No. 502/2015 passed by the High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench)UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUSDAYA RAM AND ANR Respondent(s)(with appln. (s) for c/delay in filing SLP and c/delay in refiling SLP and office report)Date : 12/08/2016 This petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J. CHELAMESWAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY MANOHAR SAPREFor Petitioner(s) Mr. A.R. Nadkarni, ASGMs. Alka Agrawal, Adv.Ms. Rukhsana Choudhury, Adv.Mr. Raj Bahadur Singh, Adv.Mr. K.P.K. Pillai, Adv. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RDelay condoned.Leave granted.Tag with Civil Appeal Nos. 6394-6395 of 2012 arising out of SLP(C) Nos. 34343-44 of 2011.(DEEPAK MANSUKHANI) (RAJINDER KAUR) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER

SECTION­XVI  LISTED ON:26.07.2016  COURT NO.:12  ITEM NO. :109 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL (C) NO.22211 of 2013 UNION OF INDIA & ANR ...Petitioner (s) Versus DIPTI BISWAS ...Respondent (s) OFFICE REPORT The matter above­mentioned was listed before the  Hon'ble Court on 08.07.2013 when the court was pleased to pass the following order:­     “Delay condoned. Issue notice. Tag with Civil Appeal Nos. 6394­95 of 2012. There shall be stay of the impugned order subject to the condition that the respondent­widow of the deceased employee shall be paid family pension admissible to her under the Rules by computing the same on the basis of the pension of the employee having been reduced by 50%.“ Accordingly Show Cause Notice was issued to the Sole Respondent.  It is submitted that counsel for the petitioner has on 14.01.2015 filed an affidavit of service with proof after serving copy of SLP and this courts order at 20.11.2014 on the sole respondent. Hence the service of notice  is complete but sole respondent has not entered his appearance so far. The matter is listed before the Hon'ble Court with this Office Report. Dated this the 25 th  day of July, 2016. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to:   Mr. S.N. Terdal, Advocate ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

ITEM NO.28 COURT NO.12 SECTION XI S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) Diary No.39246/2015 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 18/04/2015 in WP No. 502/2015 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench) UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS DAYA RAM AND ORS Respondent(s) (Office report for directions) Date : 25/07/2016 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.A. BOBDE [IN CHAMBERS] For Petitioner(s) Mr. Surender Kumar Gupta, Adv. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal, AOR For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay of 6 days in curing the defects is condoned. (RASHMI DHYANI ) (INDU POKHRIYAL) SR.P.A. COURT MASTER

ITEM NO.28 COURT NO.12 SECTION XI 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 (C) Diary No.39246/2015(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 18/04/2015in WP No. 502/2015 passed by the High Court of Judicature atAllahabad, Lucknow Bench)UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUSDAYA RAM AND ORS Respondent(s)(Office report for directions)Date : 25/07/2016 This petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.A. BOBDE [IN CHAMBERS]For Petitioner(s) Mr. Surender Kumar Gupta, Adv. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal, AOR For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RDelay of 6 days in curing the defects is condoned. (RASHMI DHYANI ) (INDU POKHRIYAL) SR.P.A. COURT MASTER

ITEM NO.124 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION XI S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. CHIRAG BHANU SINGH Civil Appeal No(s). 5133/2013 UOI & ORS. Appellant(s) VERSUS JITENDRA SRIVASTAVA Respondent(s) (with interim relief and office report) Date : 12/07/2016 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Rutwik Panda, Adv. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Service is complete but none has put in appearance on behalf of the sole respondent. Appellant has not filed the statement of case. It is no more a mandate after the amendment in the Supreme Court Rules, 2013. Registry to process the matter for listing before the Hon'ble Court, as per rules. (CHIRAG BHANU SINGH) Registrar

\220 ITEM NO.124 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION XI S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. CHIRAG BHANU SINGH Civil Appeal No(s). 5133/2013 UOI & ORS. Appellant(s) VERSUS JITENDRA SRIVASTAVA Respondent(s) (with interim relief and office report) Date : 12/07/2016 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Rutwik Panda, Adv. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Service is complete but none has put in appearance on behalf of the sole respondent. Appellant has not filed the statement of case. It is no more a mandate after the amendment in the Supreme Court Rules, 2013. Registry to process the matter for listing before the Hon'ble Court, as per rules. (CHIRAG BHANU SINGH)Signature Not Verified RegistrarDigitally signed bySONALI SAUNDDate: 2016.07.1317:15:34 ISTReason:

ITEM NO.44 COURT NO.10 SECTION XI S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) Diary No. 39246/2015 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 18/04/2015 in WP No. 502/2015 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench) UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS DAYA RAM AND ORS Respondent(s) (Office report for directions) Date : 06/04/2016 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN [IN CHAMBERS] For Petitioner(s) Mr. Varun Thakur, Adv. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal, Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Two weeks' time is granted to the learned counsel for the petitioners to cure the defects as pointed out by the Registry vide office report dated 15 th March, 2016. (RASHI GUPTA) SR. P.A. (SAROJ SAINI) COURT MASTER

òITEM NO.44 COURT NO.10 SECTION XI 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 (C) Diary No. 39246/2015(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 18/04/2015in WP No. 502/2015 passed by the High Court of Judicature atAllahabad, Lucknow Bench)UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUSDAYA RAM AND ORS Respondent(s)(Office report for directions)Date : 06/04/2016 This petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN [IN CHAMBERS]For Petitioner(s) Mr. Varun Thakur, Adv. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal, Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RTwo weeks' time is granted to the learned counsel forthe petitioners to cure the defects as pointed out by theRegistry vide office report dated 15 th March, 2016.(RASHI GUPTA)SR. P.A. (SAROJ SAINI)COURT MASTER

1 ITEM NO.37 COURT NO.1 SECTION IX 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). 6394-6395/2012 UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Appellant(s) VERSUS HARI SHANKAR DIXIT Respondent(s) WITH C.A. No. 6575/2012 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 5133/2013 (With Interim Relief and Office Report) C.A. No. 6270/2013 SLP(C) No. 22211/2013 (With Office Report) SLP(C) No. 26024/2013 SLP(C) No. 32344/2013 (With appln.(s) for c/delay in filing process fee/spare copies and appln.(s) for c/delay in filing process fee and Office Report) C.A. No. 6412/2014 SLP(C) No. 10848/2014 (With Office Report) S.L.P.(C)...CC No. 15844/2014 (With appln.(s) for c/delay in filing SLP and Office Report) Date : 26/11/2015 These appeals were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MISHRA

2 For Appellant(s) Ms. Pinki Anand, ASG Ms. Manita Verma, Adv. Mr. R. Bala, Adv. Mr. S.N. Terdal, Adv. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal,Adv. Mr. B. Krishna Prasad,Adv. Mr. D.S. Mahra,Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Anupam Lal Das,Adv. Mr. Sahil Monga, Adv. Mrs Rani Chhabra,Adv. Mr. C.K. Rai,Adv. Ms. Rekha Palli, Sr. Adv. Ms. Shruti Munjal, Adv. Mr. Deepak Goel,Adv. Mr. Ajit Sharma,Adv. Mr. Bijan Kumar Ghosh,Adv. Mr. Dinesh S Badiar, Adv. Mr. Harvinder Oberoi, Adv. Mrs. Santosh Singh,Adv. Caveator-in-person,(NP) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List after four weeks. [ Charanjeet Kaur ] [ Vinod Kulvi ] A.R.-cum-P.S. Asstt. Registrar

Ð 1 ITEM NO.37 COURT NO.1 SECTION IX 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). 6394-6395/2012 UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Appellant(s) VERSUS HARI SHANKAR DIXIT Respondent(s) WITH C.A. No. 6575/2012 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 5133/2013 (With Interim Relief and Office Report) C.A. No. 6270/2013 SLP(C) No. 22211/2013 (With Office Report) SLP(C) No. 26024/2013 SLP(C) No. 32344/2013 (With appln.(s) for c/delay in filing process fee/spare copies and appln.(s) for c/delay in filing process fee and Office Report) C.A. No. 6412/2014 SLP(C) No. 10848/2014 (With Office Report) S.L.P.(C)...CC No. 15844/2014 (With appln.(s) for c/delay in filing SLP and Office Report) Date : 26/11/2015 These appeals were called on for hearing today. CORAM :Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICECharanjeet KaurDate: 2015.11.2617:16:04 IST HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MISHRAReason: 2For Appellant(s) Ms. Pinki Anand, ASG Ms. Manita Verma, Adv. Mr. R. Bala, Adv. Mr. S.N. Terdal, Adv. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal,Adv. Mr. B. Krishna Prasad,Adv. Mr. D.S. Mahra,Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma,Adv.For Respondent(s) Mr. Anupam Lal Das,Adv. Mr. Sahil Monga, Adv.

Mrs Rani Chhabra,Adv. Mr. C.K. Rai,Adv. Ms. Rekha Palli, Sr. Adv. Ms. Shruti Munjal, Adv. Mr. Deepak Goel,Adv. Mr. Ajit Sharma,Adv. Mr. Bijan Kumar Ghosh,Adv. Mr. Dinesh S Badiar, Adv. Mr. Harvinder Oberoi, Adv. Mrs. Santosh Singh,Adv. Caveator-in-person,(NP) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List after four weeks. [ Charanjeet Kaur ] [ Vinod Kulvi ] A.R.-cum-P.S. Asstt. Registrar

1 ITEM NO.64 COURT NO.1 SECTION IX 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). 6394-6395/2012 UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Appellant(s) VERSUS HARI SHANKAR DIXIT Respondent(s) WITH C.A. No. 6575/2012 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 5133/2013 (With Interim Relief and Office Report) C.A. No. 6270/2013 (With Interim Relief and Office Report) SLP(C) No. 22211/2013 (With Office Report) SLP(C) No. 26024/2013 (With Office Report) SLP(C) No. 32344/2013 (With appln.(s) for c/delay in filing process fee/spare copies and appln.(s) for c/delay in filing process fee and Office Report) C.A. No. 6412/2014 (With Office Report) SLP(C) No. 10848/2014 (With Office Report) S.L.P.(C)...CC No. 15844/2014 (With appln.(s) for c/delay in filing SLP and appln.(s) for early hearing and Office Report) Date : 19/11/2015 These appeals/petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.A. BOBDE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MISHRA

2 For Appellant(s) Mr.Pranav Kumar, Adv. Mr.Santosh Kumar, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma,Adv. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal,Adv. Mr. B. Krishna Prasad,Adv. Mr. D. S. Mahra,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Anupam Lal Das,Adv. Mr.Sahil Monga, Adv. Ms.Priyanka Sony, Adv. For Mrs Rani Chhabra,Adv. Mr. C. K. Rai,Adv.(NP) Mr. Deepak Goel,Adv.(NP) Mr. Ajit Sharma,Adv.(NP) Mr. Bijan Kumar Ghosh,Adv.(NP) Mrs. Santosh Singh,Adv.(NP) Caveator-in-person(N.P.). UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R At the request of learned counsel for the appellant, list the matter on 26 th November, 2015. (G.V.Ramana) (Vinod Kulvi) AR-cum-PS Asstt.Registrar

SECTION XI                             Listed On : 19.11.2015           IN THE SUPREME COURT OF  INDIA       Court No. : 1                          CIVIL APPELLATE  JURISDICTION            Item No.   : 22 INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NO. 1 (Application for Condonation of Delay in filing the Special Leave Petition) IN PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL (CIVIL) CC... NO. 15844 OF 2014 WITH PRAYER FOR INTERIM RELIEF   UNION OF INDIA & ORS.     ...PETITIONER(S)        VERSUS BASANT                     ...RESPONDENT(S) OFFICE REPORT The matter above mentioned alongwith connected matters was listed before the Hon'ble Court on 04.11.2015, when the Court was pleased to pass the following order: “ At the request of learned counsel for the appellant, list the     matters on 19 th  November,2015. ” It is submitted that Notice of hearing to the Caveator­in­person has been issued on 06.11.2015 and the same has received back with postal remark “No Such Person of this name residing at the address.” The matter above mentioned is listed before the Hon'ble Court with this Report. Dated this the 18 th  day of November, 2015. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to:   Mr. S.N. Terdal , Advocate Mr. Basant, Respondent­in­Person ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

1 ITEM NO.64 COURT NO.1 SECTION IX 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). 6394-6395/2012 UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Appellant(s) VERSUS HARI SHANKAR DIXIT Respondent(s) WITH C.A. No. 6575/2012 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 5133/2013 (With Interim Relief and Office Report) C.A. No. 6270/2013 (With Interim Relief and Office Report) SLP(C) No. 22211/2013 (With Office Report) SLP(C) No. 26024/2013 (With Office Report) SLP(C) No. 32344/2013 (With appln.(s) for c/delay in filing process fee/spare copies and appln.(s) for c/delay in filing process fee and Office Report) C.A. No. 6412/2014 (With Office Report) SLP(C) No. 10848/2014 (With Office Report) S.L.P.(C)...CC No. 15844/2014 (With appln.(s) for c/delay in filing SLP and appln.(s) for early hearing and Office Report) Date : 19/11/2015 These appeals/petitions were called on for hearing today.Signature Not Verified CORAM :Digitally signed byRamana Venkata GantiDate: 2015.11.20 HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE10:45:12 ISTReason: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.A. BOBDE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MISHRA 2For Appellant(s) Mr.Pranav Kumar, Adv. Mr.Santosh Kumar, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma,Adv. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal,Adv.

Mr. B. Krishna Prasad,Adv. Mr. D. S. Mahra,Adv.For Respondent(s) Mr. Anupam Lal Das,Adv. Mr.Sahil Monga, Adv. Ms.Priyanka Sony, Adv. For Mrs Rani Chhabra,Adv. Mr. C. K. Rai,Adv.(NP) Mr. Deepak Goel,Adv.(NP) Mr. Ajit Sharma,Adv.(NP) Mr. Bijan Kumar Ghosh,Adv.(NP) Mrs. Santosh Singh,Adv.(NP) Caveator-in-person(N.P.). UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R At the request of learned counsel for the appellant, list the matter on 26th November, 2015. (G.V.Ramana) (Vinod Kulvi) AR-cum-PS Asstt.Registrar

1 ITEM NO.55 COURT NO.1 SECTION IX 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). 6394-6395/2012 UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Appellant(s) VERSUS HARI SHANKAR DIXIT Respondent(s) WITH C.A. No. 6575/2012 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 5133/2013 (With Interim Relief and Office Report) C.A. No. 6270/2013 (With Interim Relief and Office Report) SLP(C) No. 22211/2013 (With Office Report) SLP(C) No. 26024/2013 (With Office Report) SLP(C) No. 32344/2013 (With appln.(s) for c/delay in filing process fee and appln.(s) for c/delay in filing process fee/spare copies and Office Report) C.A. No. 6412/2014 (With Office Report) SLP(C) No. 10848/2014 (With Office Report) S.L.P.(C)...CC No. 15844/2014 (With appln.(s) for early hearing and appln.(s) for c/delay in filing SLP and Office Report) Date : 04/11/2015 These appeals/petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MISHRA For Appellant(s) Ms.Manita Verma,Adv. Col.R.Balasubramanian,Adv. Mr.Pranav Kumar, Adv.

2 Mr.Nalin Kohli, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma,Adv. M r. Shreekant N. Terdal,Adv. Mr. B. Krishna Prasad,Adv. Mr. D. S. Mahra,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Anupam Lal Das,Adv. Mr.Anirudh Singh, Adv. Mr.Sahil Monga, Adv. Mrs Rani Chhabra,Adv. Mr. C. K. Rai,Adv. Mr.Paramhans, Adv. Mr. Deepak Goel,Adv. Mr. Ajit Sharma,Adv. Mr. Bijan Kumar Ghosh,Adv. Mrs. Santosh Singh,Adv. Caveator-in-person. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R At the request of learned counsel for the appellant, list the matters on 19 th November, 2015. (G.V.Ramana) (Vinod Kulvi) AR-cum-PS Asstt.Registrar

Listed On: 04.11.2015 Before Court No. 1 Item No. SECTION:XIV IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL Nos.6575/2012 & 6412/2014 AND INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NO. 3 (Application for directions in C.A. No. 6575/2012) AND PETITIONS FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEL (C) Nos. 26024, 32344/2013 & 10848/2014 WITH PRAYER FOR INTERIM RELEIF AND INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NO. 2 (Application for exemption from filing certified copy of impugned order in SLP (C) No. 26024/2013) UNION OF INDIA & ANR etc. ...APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS Versus R.K.SAREEN etc. ...RESPONDENTS REVISED OFFICE REPORT CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6575/2012 It is submitted that there is sole respondent in this appeal. Service of notice of lodgment of petition of appeal is complete on the sole respondent and is represented by Mrs. Rani Chhabra, Advocate. It is further submitted that for non filing of statement of case by the counsel for the parties, office report on default was listed before the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers on 08.08.2014, when His Lordship was pleased to pass the following order:- "Perused office report dated 26.5.2014. Both the parties have not filed their statement of case so far. In view of the amendments made in the Supreme Court Rules which are going to take effect from 19th August, 2014, it is not necessary for the parties to file their respective statement of case and the same is dispensed with. List the matter before the Court." ...2/-

...2... It is further submitted that I.A. No. 3 (Application for directions) filed by counsel for the respondent was listed before the Hon'ble Court on 22.11.2013, when the Court was pleased to pass the following order:- "Expedite hearing of the appeal. List I.A.No.3 along with the main matter." Service is complete. CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6412/2014 It is submitted that there is sole respondent in this appeal and is represented by Mr. Bijan Ghosh, Advocate. It is further submitted that counsel for the parties have not filed statement of case so far. Service is complete. SLP (C) NO. 26024/2013 The matter above mentioned was listed before the Hon'ble Court on 12.08.2013, when the Court was pleased to pass the following order:- "Delay condoned. Issue notice. Tag with Civil Appeal Nos.6394-95 of 2012 and other connected matters. In the meantime, there shall be interim stay of the impugned order of the High Court. " It is submitted that pursuant to aforesaid order and after condoning the delay in filing process fee and spare copies vide order dated 30.09.2013 of Hon'ble Judge in Chamber, show cause notice to sole respondent was issued on 21.10.2013 by registered AD. The Sole respondent is represented by Mr. Deepak Goel, Advocate and counter-affidavit filed by him has been included in SLP Paper-books. Service is complete. SLP (C) NO. 32344/2013 The I.A. No. 3 (Application for Vacatiing Stay) in the matter above mentioned was listed before Hon'ble Court on 01.08.2014, when the Court was pleased to pass the following order:- ...3/-

...3... "Heard learned counsel for the applicant. We find no merit in the application and the same is accordingly dismissed." It is submitted that sole respondent in this SLP is represented by Mr. Ajit Sharma, Advocate and Counter Affidavit filed by him has been included in SLP Paper Books. Service is complete. SLP (C) NO. 10848/2014 The matter above mentioned was listed before the Hon'ble Court on 17.04.2014, when the Court was pleased to pass the following order:- "Delay condoned. Issue notice for final hearing. In the meanwhile, operation of the impugned judgment shall remain stayed. Tag with SLP (C) Nos. 34343-34344/2011." It is submitted that show cause notice was issued on 22.05.2014 through registered AD post. Mr. Santosh Singh Advocate has filed Vakalatnama/Appearance on behalf of sole respondent but he has not filed Counter Affidavit so far. Service is complete. The matters above mentioned are listed before the Hon'ble Court with this office report. DATED THIS THE 03rd DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2015. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR. Copy to: 1. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal , Advocate. 2. Mrs. Rani Chhabra, Advocate. 3. Mr. B.K. Prasad, Advocate. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR. p-2/Avi

Ø 1 ITEM NO.55 COURT NO.1 SECTION IX 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). 6394-6395/2012 UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Appellant(s) VERSUS HARI SHANKAR DIXIT Respondent(s) WITH C.A. No. 6575/2012 (With Office Report) C.A. No. 5133/2013 (With Interim Relief and Office Report) C.A. No. 6270/2013 (With Interim Relief and Office Report) SLP(C) No. 22211/2013 (With Office Report) SLP(C) No. 26024/2013 (With Office Report) SLP(C) No. 32344/2013 (With appln.(s) for c/delay in filing process fee and appln.(s) for c/delay in filing process fee/spare copies and Office Report) C.A. No. 6412/2014 (With Office Report) SLP(C) No. 10848/2014 (With Office Report) S.L.P.(C)...CC No. 15844/2014 (With appln.(s) for early hearing and appln.(s) for c/delay in filing SLP and Office Report) Date : 04/11/2015 These appeals/petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM :Signature Not Verified HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICEDigitally signed byRamana Venkata GantiDate: 2015.11.04 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MISHRA16:53:32 ISTReason: For Appellant(s) Ms.Manita Verma,Adv. Col.R.Balasubramanian,Adv. Mr.Pranav Kumar, Adv. 2

Mr.Nalin Kohli, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma,Adv. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal,Adv. Mr. B. Krishna Prasad,Adv. Mr. D. S. Mahra,Adv.For Respondent(s) Mr. Anupam Lal Das,Adv. Mr.Anirudh Singh, Adv. Mr.Sahil Monga, Adv. Mrs Rani Chhabra,Adv. Mr. C. K. Rai,Adv. Mr.Paramhans, Adv. Mr. Deepak Goel,Adv. Mr. Ajit Sharma,Adv. Mr. Bijan Kumar Ghosh,Adv. Mrs. Santosh Singh,Adv. Caveator-in-person. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R At the request of learned counsel for the appellant, list the matters on 19th November, 2015. (G.V.Ramana) (Vinod Kulvi) AR-cum-PS Asstt.Registrar

ITEM NO.28 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION XIV 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 Civil Appeal No(s). 6412/2014 UOI & ORS Appellant(s) VERSUS P.K DEB Respondent(s) Date : 01/09/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Service report in respect of the sole respondent is complete but none has entered appearance. The appeal stands complete. Registry to process to list the same before the Hon'ble Court, as per rules. (RACHNA GUPTA) Registrar

Listed On: 01.09.2015 Before Ld. Registrar Court No. 1 Item No. 28 SECTION:XIV IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No. 6412 of 2014 UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Petitioners VERSUS P. K. DEB Respondent OFFICE REPORT FOR PRE-FINAL HEARING It is submitted that for non completion of service on the sole respondent the matter was listed was listed before the Ld. Registrar on 01.04.2014 and again on 13.07.2015, when the Court was pleased to pass the following order:- "Service of the sole respondent through the High Court concerned is still awaited. Let a fresh reminder be issued. List again on 01.09.2015" As directed above a fresh reminder has been issued to the High Court on 22.07.2015 by regisgtered AD and service report in respect of the sole respondent has been received stating therein that notice has been duly served to the sole Respondent. Service is complete on the sole respondent but no one has entered appearance on his behalf so far. The matter above-mentioned is listed before the Court of Ld. Registrar with this Office Report for pre-final hearing. DATED THIS THE 31 st DAY OF AUGUST, 2015. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to : Mr. S. N. Terdal, Adv., Ch. No. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR P-3/NK

( ITEM NO.28 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION XIV 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 Civil Appeal No(s). 6412/2014 UOI & ORS Appellant(s) VERSUS P.K DEB Respondent(s) Date : 01/09/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Service report in respect of the sole respondent is complete but none has entered appearance. The appeal stands complete. Registry to process to list the same before the Hon'ble Court, as per rules. (RACHNA GUPTA) RegistrarSignature Not VerifiedDigitally signed byRupam DhamijaDate: 2015.09.0417:23:01 ISTReason:

Listed On: 19.08.2015 Before Court No. Item No. SECTION:XIV IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL Nos.6575/2012 & 6412/2014 AND INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NO. 3 (Application for directions in C.A. No. 6575/2012) AND PETITIONS FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEL (C) Nos. 26024, 32344/2013 & 10848/2014 WITH PRAYER FOR INTERIM RELEIF AND INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NO. 2 (Application for exemption from filing certified copy of impugned order in SLP (C) No. 26024/2013) UNION OF INDIA & ANR etc. ...APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS Versus R.K.SAREEN etc. ...RESPONDENTS OFFICE REPORT CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6575/2012 It is submitted that there is sole respondent in this appeal. Service of notice of lodgment of petition of appeal is complete on the sole respondent and is represented by Mrs. Rani Chhabra, Advocate. It is further submitted that for non filing of statement of case by the counsel for the parties, office report on default was listed before the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers on 08.08.2014, when His Lordship was pleased to pass the following order:- "Perused office report dated 26.5.2014. Both the parties have not filed their statement of case so far. In view of the amendments made in the Supreme Court Rules which are going to take effect from 19th August, 2014, it is not necessary for the parties to file their respective statement of case and the same is dispensed with. List the matter before the Court." ...2/-

...2... It is further submitted that I.A. No. 3 (Application for directions) filed by counsel for the respondent was listed before the Hon'ble Court on 22.11.2013, when the Court was pleased to pass the following order:- "Expedite hearing of the appeal. List I.A.No.3 along with the main matter." Service is complete. CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6412/2014 It is submitted that leave was granted in this matter vide this Courts order dated 07.07.2014. It is further submitted that notice of lodgment of petition of appeal was issued to the sole respondent on 30.07.2014 through High Court. It is further submitted that letter dated 28.08.2014 has been received from High Court stating that notice of lodgment of petition of appeal could not be served on the sole respondent as he was not available at the given address and some other person is the present occupant of the bunglow. It is further submitted that for non completion of service on the sole respondent the matter was listed before the Court of Ld. Registrar on 01.04.2015 and again on 13.07.2015, when the Court was pleased to pass the following order:- "Service of the sole respondent through the High Court concerned is still awaited. Let a fresh reminder be issued. List again on 01.09.2015. " As directed above a fresh reminder has been issued to the High Court on 22.07.2015 by registered AD but service report in respect of the sole respondent is still awaited. Service is not complete on the sole respondent. SLP (C) NO. 26024/2013 The matter above mentioned was listed before the Hon'ble Court on 12.08.2013, when the Court was pleased to pass the following order:- ...3/-

...3... "Delay condoned. Issue notice. Tag with Civil Appeal Nos.6394-95 of 2012 and other connected matters. In the meantime, there shall be interim stay of the impugned order of the High Court. " It is submitted that pursuant to aforesaid order and after condoning the delay in filing process fee and spare copies vide order dated 30.09.2013 of Hon'ble Judge in Chamber, show cause notice to sole respondent was issued on 21.10.2013 by registered AD. Mrs. Rekha Palli, Advocate has filed Vakalatnama/Appearance as well as Counter Affidavit on behalf of the respondent and Counter Affidavit has been included in SLP Paper Books. It is further submitted that since Mrs. Rekha Palli, advocated has been designated as senior advocate, notice for alternative arrangement has been issued to the sole respondent by regd. A.D. Service of said notice is awaited. SLP (C) NO. 32344/2013 The I.A. No. 3 (Application for Vacatiing Stay) in the matter above mentioned was listed before Hon'ble Court on 01.08.2014, when the Court was pleased to pass the following order:- "Heard learned counsel for the applicant. We find no merit in the application and the same is accordingly dismissed." It is submitted that sole respondent in this SLP is represented by Mr. Ajit Sharma, Advocate and Counter Affidavit filed by him has been included in SLP Paper Books. Service is complete. SLP (C) NO. 10848/2014 The matter above mentioned was listed before the Hon'ble Court on 17.04.2014, when the Court was pleased to pass the following order:- ...4/-

...4... "Delay condoned. Issue notice for final hearing. In the meanwhile, operation of the impugned judgment shall remain stayed. Tag with SLP (C) Nos. 34343-34344/2011." It is submitted that show cause notice was issued on 22.05.2014 through registered AD post. Mr. Santosh Singh Advocate has filed Vakalatnama/Appearance on behalf of sole respondent but he has not filed Counter Affidavit so far. Service is complete. The matters above mentioned are listed before the Hon'ble Court with this office report. DATED THIS THE 18th DAY OF AUGUST, 2015. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR. Copy to: 1. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal , Advocate. 2. Mrs. Rani Chhabra, Advocate. 3. Mr. B.K. Prasad, Advocate. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR. p-2/Avi

ITEM NO.22 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION XIV 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 Civil Appeal No(s). 6412/2014 UOI & ORS Appellant(s) VERSUS P.K DEB Respondent(s) Date : 13/07/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal,Adv. Mr Sachin Sharma, Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Service of the sole respondent through the High Court concerned is still awaited. Let a fresh reminder be issued. List again on 1.9.2015. (RACHNA GUPTA) Registrar

LISTED ON: 13.07.2015 BEFORE LD. REGISTRAR COURT NO: 1 ITEM NO: 22 SECTION:XIV IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No. 6412/2014 UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ... PETITIONERS VERSUS DR. P.K.DEB ...RESPONDENTS OFFICE REPORT It is submitted that for non completion of service on the sole respondent the matter was listed before the Court of Ld. Registrar on 01.04.2015 when the Court was pleased to pass the following Order:- “The ld. Counsel for the petitioner has requested four weeks time to provide the fresh address of the sole respondent. Be furnished accordingly. Notice thereafter, be issued. List on 13.07.2015.” It is further submitted that as directed above, counsel for the appellants has on 23.04.2015 furnished the latest and correct address of the sole respondent and notice of lodgment of petition of appeal was issued to the sole respondent through High Court on the fresh address by regd. A.D. on 29.04.2015 but certificate of service is awaited from the High Court. It is lastly submitted that the matter is on board alongwith main matter C.A. No. 6575/2012. DATED THIS THE 10 th DAY OF JULY, 2015. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR COPY TO: Mr. S. N. Terdal, Adv. Ch. No. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR p-1

\222 ITEM NO.22 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION XIV 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 Civil Appeal No(s). 6412/2014 UOI & ORS Appellant(s) VERSUS P.K DEB Respondent(s) Date : 13/07/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal,Adv. Mr Sachin Sharma, Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Service of the sole respondent through the High Court concerned is still awaited. Let a fresh reminder be issued. List again on 1.9.2015. (RACHNA GUPTA) RegistrarSignature Not VerifiedDigitally signed byHema JoshiDate: 2015.07.1617:34:45 ISTReason:

ITEM NO.114 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION XVI 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 Civil Appeal No(s). 6270/2013 U.O.I & ORS. Appellant(s) VERSUS SUBHASH CHANDRA SARKAR Respondent(s) Date : 24/04/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Ms. Bharti Tyagi, Adv. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Ravin Dubey, Adv. Mr. C. K. Rai,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Service is complete on the sole respondent. Sole respondent has filed the counter affidavit. Statement of case, however, has not been filed by the parties. Time stipulated for the purpose has already expired. Otherwise also after the amendment in Supreme Court Rules, 2013, it is no more a mandate. Chronology of events already on record is presumed to have been accepted by the parties. The appeal stands complete, in the given circumstances. Registry to process to list the same before the Hon'ble Court, as per rules. (RACHNA GUPTA) Registrar

J ITEM NO.114 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION XVI 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 Civil Appeal No(s). 6270/2013 U.O.I & ORS. Appellant(s) VERSUS SUBHASH CHANDRA SARKAR Respondent(s) Date : 24/04/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Ms. Bharti Tyagi, Adv. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Ravin Dubey, Adv. Mr. C. K. Rai,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Service is complete on the sole respondent. Sole respondent has filed the counter affidavit. Statement of case, however, has not been filed by the parties. Time stipulated for the purpose has already expired. Otherwise also after the amendment in Supreme Court Rules, 2013, it is no more a mandate. Chronology of events already on record is presumed to have been accepted by the parties. The appeal stands complete, in the given circumstances.Signature Not Verified Registry to process to list the same before the Hon'bleDigitally signed byRupam DhamijaDate: 2015.05.02 Court, as per rules.12:50:11 ISTReason: (RACHNA GUPTA) Registrar

ITEM NO.41 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION XIV 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 Civil Appeal No(s). 6412/2014 UOI & ORS Appellant(s) VERSUS P.K DEB Respondent(s) Date : 01/04/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The ld. Counsel for the petitioner has requested four weeks time to provide the fresh address of the sole respondent. Be furnished accordingly. Notice thereafter, be issued. List on 13.07.2015. (RACHNA GUPTA) Registrar JG

LISTED ON: 01.04.2015 BEFORE COURT NO: ITEM NO: SECTION:XIV IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6412 of 2014 UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ... PETITIONERS VERSUS P. K. DEB ...RESPONDENT OFFICE REPORT It is submitted that leave was granted in this matter vide this Court’s Order dated 07.07.2014. It is further submitted that notice of lodgment of petition of appeal was issued to the sole respondent on 30.07.2014 through High Court. It is further submitted that letter dated 28.08.2014 has been received from High Court stating that notice of lodgment of petition of appeal could not be served on the sole respondent Dr. P. K. Deb at the given address as he has left from that place and Mr. B. Dhawan is the present occupant of the bunglow. It is lastly submitted that counsel for the appellants has not furnished the latest and correct address of the sole respondent so far despite this Registry’s letter dated 20.02.2015 Service is not complete on the sole respondent. The appeal above-mentioned is listed before the Court of Ld. Registrar with this Office Report. DATED THIS THE 31 st DAY OF MARCH, 2015. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to: Mr. S. N. Terdal, Adv . Ch. No. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR p-1

ITEM NO.41 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION XIV 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 Civil Appeal No(s). 6412/2014 UOI & ORS Appellant(s) VERSUS P.K DEB Respondent(s) Date : 01/04/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The ld. Counsel for the petitioner has requested four weeks time to provide the fresh address of the sole respondent. Be furnished accordingly. Notice thereafter, be issued. List on 13.07.2015. (RACHNA GUPTA) Registrar JGSignature Not VerifiedDigitally signed byRupam DhamijaDate: 2015.04.0820:03:51 ISTReason:

ITEM NO.31 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION XVI 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). 22211/2013 UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS DIPTI BISWAS Respondent(s) (with office report) WITH Date : 26/02/2015 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Hemant Phalpher, Adv. Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal,Adv. For Respondent(s) Caveator-in-person,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Service is complete on the sole respondent but no one has entered appearance. The matter stands complete. Registry to process to list the same before the Hon'ble Court, as per rules. (RACHNA GUPTA) Registrar

¬ ITEM NO.31 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION XVI 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). 22211/2013 UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS DIPTI BISWAS Respondent(s) (with office report) WITH Date : 26/02/2015 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Hemant Phalpher, Adv. Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal,Adv. For Respondent(s) Caveator-in-person,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Service is complete on the sole respondent but no one has entered appearance. The matter stands complete. Registry to process to list the same before the Hon'ble Court, as per rules. (RACHNA GUPTA) RegistrarSignature Not VerifiedDigitally signed byRupam DhamijaDate: 2015.02.2813:53:06 ISTReason:

ITEM NO.5 COURT NO.5 SECTION XI S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C)......CC No(s). 15844/2014 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 06/12/2013 in WPC No.1705/2013 passed by the High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad) UNION OF INDIA AND ORS Petitioner(s) VERSUS BASANT Respondent(s) (With appln.(s) for c/delay in filing SLP and office report) Date : 28/01/2015 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.A. BOBDE For Petitioner(s) Mr.Maninder Singh, ASG Mr.R.Balasubramanian, Adv. Mr.Santosh Kumar, Adv. Mr.Pranav Kumar, Adv. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal, Adv. For Respondent(s) Caveator-in-person Upon hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Learned Additional Solicitor General appearing on behalf of the petitioners states that the controversy raised in the present petition is similar to the one pending adjudication in this Court in C.A.Nos.6394-95 of 2012 and connected matters. List the instant petition as well as the connected petitions referred to hereinabove for final disposal as per roster. List after two weeks. (SATISH KUMAR YADAV) (RENUKA SADANA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER

\210 ITEM NO.5 COURT NO.5 SECTION XI S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C)......CC No(s). 15844/2014 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 06/12/2013 in WPC No.1705/2013 passed by the High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad) UNION OF INDIA AND ORS Petitioner(s) VERSUS BASANT Respondent(s) (With appln.(s) for c/delay in filing SLP and office report) Date : 28/01/2015 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.A. BOBDE For Petitioner(s) Mr.Maninder Singh, ASG Mr.R.Balasubramanian, Adv. Mr.Santosh Kumar, Adv. Mr.Pranav Kumar, Adv. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal, Adv. For Respondent(s) Caveator-in-person Upon hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Learned Additional Solicitor General appearing on behalf of the petitioners states that the controversy raised in the present petition is similar to the one pending adjudication in this Court in C.A.Nos.6394-95 of 2012 and connected matters. List the instant petition as well as the connected petitions referred to hereinabove for final disposal as per roster. List after two weeks.Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed bySatish Kumar YadavDate: 2015.01.2916:36:38 ISTReason: (SATISH KUMAR YADAV) (RENUKA SADANA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER

ITEM NO.52 COURT NO.5 SECTION XI S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C)......CC No(s). 15844/2014 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 06/12/2013 in WP(C) No. 1705/2013 passed by the High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad) UNION OF INDIA AND ORS Petitioner(s) VERSUS BASANT Respondent(s) I.A. 1/2014(with c/delay in filing SLP and office report) Date : 27/01/2015 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.A. BOBDE For Petitioner(s) Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Basant, I n person UPON hearing the counsel and in person the Court made the following O R D E R At the request of the respondent, who appears in person, and in the interest of justice, list again on 28.01.2015. (Parveen Kr. Chawla) (Renuka Sadana) Court Master Court Master

ô ITEM NO.52 COURT NO.5 SECTION XI S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C)......CC No(s). 15844/2014 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 06/12/2013 in WP(C) No. 1705/2013 passed by the High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad) UNION OF INDIA AND ORS Petitioner(s) VERSUS BASANT Respondent(s) I.A. 1/2014(with c/delay in filing SLP and office report) Date : 27/01/2015 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.A. BOBDE For Petitioner(s) Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Basant, In person UPON hearing the counsel and in person the Court made the following O R D E R At the request of the respondent, who appears in person, and in the interest of justice, list again on 28.01.2015. (Parveen Kr. Chawla) (Renuka Sadana) Court Master Court MasterSignature Not VerifiedDigitally signed byParveen Kumar ChawlaDate: 2015.01.2716:56:44 ISTReason:

ITEM NO.30 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION XVI 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). 22211/2013 UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS DIPTI BISWAS Respondent(s) (with office report) Date : 18/12/2014 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Pranaya Kr. Mohapatra, Adv. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The office report suggests that fresh steps to be taken by the Ld. Counsel for the petitioner in respect of the sole respondent. However, the Ld. Counsel for the petitioner submits that steps have already been taken for effecting service upon the sole respondent. Office to check and report. The Ld. Counsel for the petitioner to furnish the affidavit of proof of dasti service in respect of the sole respondent within four weeks. List again on 16.2.2015. (SURAJIT DEY) Registrar

Ð ITEM NO.30 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION XVI 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). 22211/2013 UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS DIPTI BISWAS Respondent(s) (with office report) Date : 18/12/2014 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Pranaya Kr. Mohapatra, Adv. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The office report suggests that fresh steps to be taken by the Ld. Counsel for the petitioner in respect of the sole respondent. However, the Ld. Counsel for the petitioner submits that steps have already been taken for effecting service upon the sole respondent. Office to check and report. The Ld. Counsel for the petitioner to furnish the affidavit of proof of dasti service in respect of the sole respondent within four weeks.Signature Not Verified List again on 16.2.2015.Digitally signed byRupam DhamijaDate: 2014.12.2212:27:07 ISTReason: (SURAJIT DEY) Registrar

SECTION­XVI     LISTED On :20/11/2014     COURT No. :R­1     ITEM No.  :45 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL (CIVIL) No. 22211 of 2013 (With prayer for interim relief) Union of India & Ors.             ... Petitioners Versus Dipti Biswas      ... Respondent OFFICE­REPORT The matter above mentioned was listed before the Learned Registrar's Court on 27/08/2014 when he was pleased to pass the following Order: ­ “ CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6575/2012 Matter falls under complete category. As and when connected matters are complete, orders would be passed. SLP(C) NO. 26024/2013 Despite granting of final opportunity by the Registrar's Court on 7.5.2014 counter affidavit has not been filed till date. Matter falls under complete category. As and when connected matters are complete, orders would be passed. CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6412/2014 Service report is awaited. Receipt of original record is also awaited. SLP(C) NO. 22211/2013 Service report is awaited. List again on 19.11.2014.“ It is submitted that neither AD card nor userved cover containing notice has been received back from the sole respondent, so far and a period of 30 days from the date of issue of notice has elapsed. The matter above mentioned is listed before the Learned Registrar's Court with this Office­Report. Dated this the 19 th  day of November, 2014. Assistant Registrar Copy to: ­  Mr. S.N. Terdal, Advocate Assistant Registrar

ITEM NO.45 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION XVI 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 Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 22211/2013 UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS DIPTI BISWAS Respondent(s) (with office report) WITH C.A. No. 6412/2014 Date : 20/11/2014 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Ms. Mamta Saxena, Adv. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R C.A. No. 6412/2014 Deleted. SLP(C) No.22211/2013 Fresh steps have not been taken for the sole respondent, despite earlier order and the period of 30 days also got elapsed long back. Hence, list the matter before the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers. (DR. K. ARUL) Registrar

Ê ITEM NO.45 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION XVI 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 Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 22211/2013 UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS DIPTI BISWAS Respondent(s) (with office report) WITH C.A. No. 6412/2014 Date : 20/11/2014 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Ms. Mamta Saxena, Adv. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R C.A. No. 6412/2014 Deleted. SLP(C) No.22211/2013 Fresh steps have not been taken for the sole respondent, despite earlier order and the period of 30 days also got elapsed long back. Hence, list the matter before the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers.Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed byRupam DhamijaDate: 2014.11.2213:29:47 ISTReason: (DR. K. ARUL) Registrar

ITEM NO.14 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION XIV 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 Civil Appeal No(s). 6575/2012 UNION OF INDIA & ANR Appellant(s) VERSUS R.K.SAREEN Respondent(s) WITH SLP(C) No. 22211/2013 (With appln.(s) for Office Report) SLP(C) No. 26024/2013 (With appln.(s) for Office Report) C.A. No. 6412/2014 (With appln.(s) for Office Report) Date : 27/08/2014 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr A Deb Kumar, Adv. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal ,Adv. Mr. B. Krishna Prasad ,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mrs Rani Chhabra ,Adv. Ms Ankita Patniak, Adv. Mrs. Rekha Palli ,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R CIVIL APPEAL NO.6575/2012 Matter falls under complete category. As and when connected matters are complete, orders would be passed. SLP(C) NO.26024/2013 Despite granting of final opportunity by the Registrar's Court on 7.5.2014 counter affidavit has not been filed till date.

-2- Item No.14 Matter falls under complete category. As and when connected matters are complete, orders would be passed. CIVIL APPEAL NO.6412/2014 Service report is awaited. Receipt of original record is also awaited. SLP(C) No. 22211/2013 Service report is awaited. List again on 19.11.2014. (PANKAJ BHANDARI) Registrar

SECTION­XVI     LISTED On :27/08/2014     COURT No. :R­1     ITEM No.  :14 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL (C) No. 22211 of 2013 (With prayer for interim relief) Union of India & Ors.             ... Petitioners Versus Dipti Biswas      ... Respondent OFFICE­REPORT The matter above mentioned was listed before the Hon'ble Court on 8/07/2013 when the Court was pleased to pass the following Order: ­ “Delay condoned. Issue notice. Tag with Civil Appeal Nos. 6394­95 of 2012. There shall be stay of the impugned order subject to the condition that the respondent­widow of the deceased employee shall be paid family pension admissible to her under the Rules by computing the same on the basis of the pension of the employee having been reduced by 50%.“ Accordingly show cause notice for due course was issued on 16/08/2013 to all the sole respondent by registered AD Post. Neither AD Card nor unserved envelope containing the notice has been received back from the said sole respondent so far and a period of 30 days from the date of issue of notice has elapsed. The matter above mentioned is listed before the Learned Registrar's Court with this Office­Report. Dated this the 26 th  day of August, 2014. Assistant Registrar Copy to: ­  Mr. S.N. Terdal, Advocate Assistant Registrar

Listed On: 27.08.2014 Before Ld. Registrar Court No. 1 Item No. 14 SECTION:XIV IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.6575/2012, 6412/2014 AND SLP (C) NO. 26024/2013 UNION OF INDIA & ANR ...APPELLANTS Versus R.K.SAREEN ...RESPONDENT OFFICE REPORT CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6575/2012 It is submitted that there is sole respondent in this appeal. Service of notice of lodgment of petition of appeal is complete on the sole respondent and is represented by Mrs. Rani Chhabra, Advocate. It is further submitted that for non filing of statement of case by the counsel for the parties, office report on default was listed before the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers on 08.08.2014, when His Lordship was pleased to pass the following order:- "Perused office report dated 26.5.2014. Both the parties have not filed their statement of case so far. In view of the amendments made in the Supreme Court Rules which are going to take effect from 19th August, 2014, it is not necessary for the parties to file their respective statement of case and the same is dispensed with. List the matter before the Court." Original record has been received from the High Court. CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6412/2014 It is submitted that leave was granted in this matter vide this Courts order dated 07.07.2014. It is further submitted that there is sole respondent in this appeal. Certificate of service and original record have been awaited from the High Court. ...2/-

...2... SLP (C) NO. 26024/2013 The matter above mentioned was listed before the Court of Ld. Registrar on 07.05.2014, when the Court was pleased to pass the following order:- "Sole respondent to file counter affidavit within six weeks time, which is granted as a final chance. List again on 27.8.2014." It is submitted that Counsel appearing for sole respondent has not filed counter affidavit so far despite being given final chance to do so on 07.05.2014 by Court of Ld. Registrar. The matters above mentioned are listed before the Court of Ld. Registrar with this office report. DATED THIS THE 26th DAY OF AUGUST, 2014. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR. Copy to: 1. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal , Advocate. 2. Mrs. Rani Chhabra, Advocate. 3. Mr. B.K. Prasad, Advocate. 4. Ms Rekha Palli, Advvocate. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR. p-2/Avi

Ô ITEM NO.14 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION XIV 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 Civil Appeal No(s). 6575/2012 UNION OF INDIA & ANR Appellant(s) VERSUS R.K.SAREEN Respondent(s) WITH SLP(C) No. 22211/2013 (With appln.(s) for Office Report) SLP(C) No. 26024/2013 (With appln.(s) for Office Report) C.A. No. 6412/2014 (With appln.(s) for Office Report) Date : 27/08/2014 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr A Deb Kumar, Adv. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal ,Adv. Mr. B. Krishna Prasad ,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mrs Rani Chhabra ,Adv. Ms Ankita Patniak, Adv. Mrs. Rekha Palli ,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R CIVIL APPEAL NO.6575/2012 Matter falls under complete category. As and when connected matters are complete, orders would be passed. SLP(C) NO.26024/2013Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed byHema JoshiDate: 2014.08.2916:34:32 ISTReason: Despite granting of final opportunity by the Registrar's Court on 7.5.2014 counter affidavit has not been filed till date. -2-Item No.14 Matter falls under complete category. As and whenconnected matters are complete, orders would be passed.

CIVIL APPEAL NO.6412/2014 Service report is awaited. Receipt of original record is also awaited.SLP(C) No. 22211/2013 Service report is awaited. List again on 19.11.2014. (PANKAJ BHANDARI) Registrar

ITEM NO.38 COURT NO.7 SECTION XIV 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). 6575/2012 UNION OF INDIA & ANR Appellant(s) VERSUS R.K.SAREEN Respondent(s) (Office report on default) Date : 08/08/2014 This appeal was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI [IN CHAMBER] For Appellant(s) Ms. Sukhbeer Kaur Bajwa,Adv. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal ,Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Priyanka Sony,Adv. Mrs Rani Chhabra ,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Perused office report dated 26.5.2014. Both the parties have not filed their statement of case so far. In view of the amendments made in the Supreme Court Rules which are going to take effect from 19th August, 2014, it is not necessary for the parties to file their respective statement of case and the same is dispensed with. List the matter before the Court. (SUMAN WADHWA) (SUMAN JAIN) AR-cum-PS COURT MASTERSignature Not VerifiedDigitally signed bySuman WadhwaDate: 2014.08.1411:11:43 ISTReason:

LISTED ON: 01.08.2014 BEFORE COURT NO.: 6 ITEM NO.: 2 SECTION:XIV IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NO. 3 (Application for vacating stay) IN PETITIONS FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL (C)NO. 32344 OF 2013 UNION OF INDIA & ANR. ... PETITIONERS VERSUS DR. MRS. RUCHIKA MANCHAND ...RESPONDENT OFFICE REPORT The application for vacating stay in the matter above mentioned was listed before the Hon'ble Court on 11.07.2014 with office report dated 02.07.2014, when the Court was pleased to pass the following order:- “ Learned counsel for the respondent seeks an adjournment so as to enable her to file counter affidavit. Prayer is allowed. Counter affidavit be filed within one week. List for final disposal after two weeks. ” It is submitted that as directed above, counsel appearing for the respondent has on 16.07.2014 filed counter affidavit and the same is being circulated herewith. It is further submitted that the instant matter has been tagged with C.A. No. 6394-95/2012 @ SLP(C) No. 34343-34344/2011 and the said matter is not ready. Service is complete. The application in the matter above mentioned is listed before the Hon'ble Court with this office report. DATED THIS THE 31 st DAY OF July, 2014. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR COPY TO: Mr. B.K. Prasad, Advocate Mr. Ajit Sharma, Advocate ASSISTANT REGISTRAR p-1

8 ITEM NO.2 COURT NO.6 SECTION XIV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. 3/2014 in Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 32344/2013 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 18/03/2013 in WPC No. 1732/2013 passed by the High Court of Delhi at N. Delhi) UNION OF INDIA & ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUS RUCHIKA MANCHANDA Respondent(s) (For vacating stay and office report) Date : 01/08/2014 This application was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. AGRAWAL For Petitioner(s) Mr.Maninder Singh, ASG Mrs.Sunita B.Rao, Adv. Mr.Vikas Bansal, Adv. Mr. B. Krishna Prasad, Adv. For Respondent(s)/ Mr. Ajit Sharma, Adv. Applicant Mr.Rajiv Choudhary, Adv. Upon hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Heard learned counsel for the applicant. We find no merit in the application and the same is accordingly dismissed. (SATISH KUMAR YADAV) (PHOOLAN WATI ARORA) COURT MASTER ASSISTANT REGISTRARSignature Not VerifiedDigitally signed bySatish Kumar YadavDate: 2014.08.0116:10:12 ISTReason:

LISTED ON: 11.07.2014 BEFORE COURT NO.: 7 ITEM NO.: 2 SECTION:XIV IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NO. 3 (Application for vacating stay) IN PETITIONS FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL (C)NO. 32344 OF 2013 UNION OF INDIA & ANR. ... PETITIONERS VERSUS DR. MRS. RUCHIKA MANCHAND ...RESPONDENT OFFICE REPORT The matter above mentioned was listed before the Hon'ble Court on 07.10.2013, when the Court was pleased to pass the following order:- “Delay condoned . Issue notice for final hearing. In the meanwhile, operation of the impugned Judgment shall remain stayed. Tag with SLP(C) Nos. 34343-34344/2011.” It is submitted that for non-filing of process fee and spare copies of SLP, the Office Report for Directions in the matter above mentioned was listed before the Hon'ble Judge in Chamber on 24.01.2014 when His Lordship was pleased to pass the following order: “At the request of learned counsel for the petitioners, two weeks' time is granted to file the application for condonation of delay in filing process fee and spare copy of the SLP.” It is further submitted that counsel for the petitioner has on 27.02.2014 filed application for condonation of delay in filing process fee and spare copies barred by time by 20 days (Regd. as I.A. No.2) and the same has been included in SLP paper books. It is, however, submitted that Mr. Ajit Sharma, Advocate has on 28.05.2014 filed Vakalatnama/Appearance on behalf of the respondent. Accordingly show cause notice to the sole respondent was issued through the advocate. The Counsel for the respondent has not filed counter affidavit so far. ..2/-

..2.. It is also submitted that counsel for the respondent has on 05.06.2014 filed an application for vacating stay of the Court's order dated 7.10.2013 as separate volume (Registered as I.A. No. 3) and the same has been placed with SLP paper books. The application for vacating stay in the matter above mentioned is listed before the Hon'ble Court with this office report. DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF July, 2014. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR COPY TO: Mr. B.K. Prasad, Advocate Mr. Ajit Sharma, Advocate ASSISTANT REGISTRAR p-1

\236 ITEM NO.2 COURT NO.7 SECTION XIV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. 3/2014 in Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 32344/2013 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 18/03/2013 in WPC No. 1732/2013 passed by the High Court Of Delhi At N. Delhi) UNION OF INDIA & ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUS RUCHIKA MANCHAND Respondent(s) (For vacating stay and office report) Date : 11/07/2014 This application was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. AGRAWAL For Petitioner(s) Mr.Maninder Singh, ASG Ms.B.Sunita Rao, Adv. Mr.Vikas Bansal, Adv. Ms.Sushma Suri, Adv. Mr. B. Krishna Prasad, Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms.Shikha B., Adv. Mr. Ajit Sharma, Adv. Mr.Rajiv Kumar Choudhry, Adv. Upon hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Learned counsel for the respondent seeks an adjournment so as to enable her to file counter affidavit. Prayer is allowed. Counter affidavit be filed within one week. List for final disposal after two weeks.Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed bySatish Kumar YadavDate: 2014.07.12 (SATISH KUMAR YADAV)13:32:08 ISTReason: (PHOOLAN WATI ARORA) COURT MASTER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

H ITEM NO.21 COURT NO.13 SECTION XIV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C)......CC No(s). 7788/2014 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 28/10/2013 in WPC No. 4533/2009 passed by the High Court Of Gauhati at Gauhati) UOI & ORS Petitioner(s) VERSUS P.K DEB Respondent(s) (With appln. (s) for c/delay in filing SLP and office report) Date : 07/07/2014 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN B LOKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C NAGAPPAN For Petitioner(s) Mr. Tushar Mehta, ASG Mr. P.S. Patwalia, ASG. Ms. Manita Verma, Adv. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal ,Adv. Ms. Rashmi Malhotra, Adv. Ms. Saroj Bala, Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned. Leave granted. Tag with C.A. No. 6575 of 2012 arising out of SLP (C) No. CC.14883 of 2012. In the meanwhile, the order passed by the High Court shall remain stayed.Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed byMeenakshi KohliDate: 2014.07.0813:21:19 ISTReason: (MEENAKSHI KOHLI) (JASWINDER KAUR) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER

^ ITEM NO.16 COURT NO.6 SECTION XIV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C)......CC No(s). 7788/2014 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 28/10/2013 in WPC 4533/2009 passed by the High Court Of Gauhati) UOI & ORS Petitioner(s) VERSUS P.K DEB Respondent(s) (with appln. (s) for c/delay in filing SLP and office report) Date : 01/07/2014 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN B LOKUR For Petitioner(s) Mr. P.S. Patwalia, ASG Ms. Manita Verma, Adv. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal ,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R On the request of the learned counsel for the petitioners, post the matter on 7th July, 2014. (Neeta) (Usha Sharma) Sr. P.A. Court MasterSignature Not VerifiedDigitally signed byNeeta SapraDate: 2014.07.0310:52:08 ISTReason:

6ITEM NO.81 REGISTRAR COURT.1 SECTION XIV 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).26024/2013U.O.I & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUSA.D SURESH BABU Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for exemption from filing c/c of the impugned order)Date: 07/05/2014 This Petition was called on for hearing today.For Petitioner(s) Ms Anjali Chauhan, Adv. Mr. B. Krishna Prasad,Adv.For Respondent(s) Mrs.Rekha Palli,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Sole respondent to file counter affidavit within sixweeks time, which is granted as a final chance. List again on 27.8.2014. (M.A. SAYEED) REGISTRARhj

öITEM NO.13 Court No.4 SECTION XIV 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)....../2014 CC 5964/2014(From the judgement and order dated 13/02/2013 in WPCNo.5071/2012, of The HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT N. DELHI)UOI & ORS Petitioner(s) VERSUSRAJ KUMAR Respondent(s)WITH I.A. 1(With appln(s) for c/delay in filing SLP and office report)Date: 17/04/2014 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE B.S. CHAUHAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J. CHELAMESWARFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Rakesh Kumar Khanna, ASG Mr. Surya Kant, Adv. Mr. S.S. Rawat, Adv. Mr. Anirudh Tanwar, Adv. Mr. Pranav Vyas, Adv. Ms. Seema Rao, Adv. Mr. Mohit Nagar, Adv. Mr. Ragini Singh, Adv. Mr. H.D.S harma, Adv. Ms. Purnima Jauhari, Adv. Ms. Priyanka, Adv. Mr. D.S. Mahra,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned. Issue notice for final hearing. In the meanwhile, operation of the impugned judgment shall remain stayed. Tag with SLP(C) Nos. 34343-34344/2011. (DEEPAK MANSUKHANI) (M.S. NEGI) Court Master Assistant Registrar

LITEM NO.71 REGISTRAR COURT.1 SECTION XIV 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 SANJIV JAINPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).26024/2013U.O.I & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUSA.D SURESH BABU Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for exemption from filing c/c of the impugned order)Date: 27/02/2014 This Petition was called on for hearing today.For Petitioner(s) Mr. B. Krishna Prasad,Adv. Mr Tulsi Prasad Rastogi, Adv.For Respondent(s) Mrs.Rekha Palli,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R None for the respondent. The ld. Counsel for the petitioner is present. Four weeks time is granted to the sole respondent for filingcounter affidavit, if any. List again on 1.5.2014.| | |(SANJIV JAIN) || | |REGISTRAR |hj

®ITEM NO.41 IN COURT NO.5 SECTION XIV 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).32344/2013(From the judgement and order dated 18/03/2013 in WPC No.1732/2013of The HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT N. DELHI)UNION OF INDIA & ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUSRUCHIKA MANCHAND Respondent(s)(OFFICE REPORT ON DEFAULT)Date: 24/01/2014 Office Report on Default in this Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FAKKIR MOHAMED IBRAHIM KALIFULLA (IN CHAMBERS)For Petitioner(s) Mr. B. Krishna Prasad, Adv. Ms. Shubhra Rai, Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R At the request of learned counsel for the petitioners, two weeks' time is granted to file the application for condonation of delay in filing process fee and spare copy of the SLP. (G. SUDHAKARA RAO) (SURESH KUMAR VERMA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER

pITEM NO.3 COURT NO.4 SECTION XIV 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. 6575 OF 2012UNION OF INDIA & ANR Appellant (s) VERSUSR.K.SAREEN Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for directions and office report )Date: 22/11/2013 This Appln. was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.L. DATTU HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN B. LOKURFor Appellant(s) Mr.Rakesh K.Khanna, ASG Ms.Anjani Aiyagari, Adv. Ms.B.Sunita Rao, Adv. Mr.Mohit Nagar, Adv. For Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal,Adv.For Respondent(s) Mrs Rani Chhabra,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Expedite hearing of the appeal. List I.A.No.3 along with the main matter. (G.V.Ramana) (Vinod Kulvi) Court Master Asstt.Registrar

ìITEM NO.1 COURT NO.14 SECTION XIV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSI.A. NO.3 in CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6575 OF 2012UNION OF INDIA & ANR Appellant (s) VERSUSR.K.SAREEN Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for directions and office report)Date: 17/10/2013 This matter was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE RANJANA PRAKASH DESAI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN B. LOKURFor Appellant(s) Mr. Rakesh K. Khanna,ASG Ms. Anjani Aiyagari,Adv. Ms. B. Sunita Rao,Adv. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal,Adv.For Respondent(s) Mrs. Rani Chhabra,Adv. Ms. Priyanka Sony,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Adjourned for two weeks. |(NARENDRA PRASAD) | |(INDU POKHRIYAL) ||COURT MASTER | |COURT MASTER | 1

\ITEM NO.24 Court No.5 SECTION XIV 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)....../2013 CC 17527/2013(From the judgement and order dated 18/03/2013 in WPC No.1732/2013, of TheHIGH COURT OF DELHI AT N. DELHI)UNION OF INDIA & ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUSRUCHIKA MANCHAND Respondent(s)WITH I.A. 1(With appln(s) for c/delay in filing SLP and office report)Date: 07/10/2013 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE B.S. CHAUHAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.A. BOBDEFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Paras Kuhad, ASG Mr. Vikas Bansal, Adv. Mr. Deepkaran Singh Dalal, Adv. Mr. B. Krishna Prasad,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned. Issue notice for final hearing. In the meanwhile, operation of the impugned judgment shall remain stayed. Tag with SLP(C) Nos. 34343-34344/2011.

| (DEEPAK MANSUKHANI) |(M.S. NEGI) || Court Master | Court Master |

ìITEM NO.55 COURT NO.15 SECTION XIV 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).26024/2013(From the judgement and order dated 30/01/2013 in CWP No.539/2013 of The HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT N. DELHI)U.O.I & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUSA.D SURESH BABU Respondent(s)(OFFICE REPORT ON DEFAULT)Date: 30/09/2013 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN B. LOKUR (IN CHAMBERS)For Petitioner(s) Ms. Rashmi Malhotra, Adv. Mr. B. Krishna Prasad, Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R On the oral request of the learned counsel for the petitioners, delay in filing process fee and spare copies of the S.L.P. is condoned. (G. SUDHAKARA RAO) (INDU POKHRIYAL) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER

\226ITEM NO.35 COURT NO.5 SECTION XIV 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)....../2013 CC 13010/2013(From the judgement and order dated 30/01/2013 in CWP No.539/2013, of TheHIGH COURT OF DELHI AT N. DELHI)U.O.I & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUSA.D SURESH BABU Respondent(s)WITH I.A.1(With appln(s) for c/delay in filing SLP)Date: 12/08/2013 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE B.S. CHAUHAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.A. BOBDEFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Rakesh Kr. Khanna, ASG Ms. Saroj Bala, Adv. Mr. Virender K. Singh, Adv. Ms. Seema Thapliyal, Adv. Mr. B. Krishna Prasad,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned. Issue notice. Tag with Civil Appeal Nos.6394-95 of 2012 and other connected matters. In the meantime, there shall be interim stay of the impugned order of the High Court. (O.P. Sharma) (M.S. Negi) Court Master Court Master

àITEM NO.37 COURT NO.11 SECTION XVI 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)....../2013 CC 12800/2013(From the judgement and order dated 10/01/2013 in WPCT No.440/2012 of theHIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA)U.O.I & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSUBHASH CHANDRA SARKAR Respondent(s)(With I.A. No.1 for c/delay in filing SLP)Date: 29/07/2013 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.L. GOKHALE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J. CHELAMESWARFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Rakesh K. Khanna,ASG Mr. Ashok Kumar,Adv. Ms. Saroj Bala,Adv. for Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Heard Mr. Khanna, learned Additional Solicitor General in support of this special leave petition. Delay condoned. Leave granted. In the meanwhile and until further orders, the order passed by the High Court directing furnishing of a copy of the Union Public Service Commission's advice to the delinquent employee, will remain stayed. However, the proceedings against the respondent shall continue. Liberty is granted to the respondent to apply. Tag with C.A. No.6575/2012 arising out of SLP(C) No......CC 14883/2012. (A.S. BISHT) (SNEH LATA SHARMA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER

\ITEM NO.5 COURT NO.3 SECTION XIV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSI.A. No. 3/2013 in CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6575 OF 2012UNION OF INDIA & ANR Appellant (s) VERSUSR.K.SAREEN Respondent(s)/ Applicant(s)(for directions and office report ))Date: 29/07/2013 This Appeal was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.M. LODHA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN B. LOKURFor Appellant(s) Mr. Rakesh Khanna, A.S.G. Ms. Anjani Aiyagari, Adv. Ms. B. Sunita Rao, Adv. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal,Adv.For Respondent(s)/For Applicant(s) Mrs Rani Chhabra,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Mr. Rakesh Khanna, learned Additional Solicitor General for Union of India, prays for time to enable the advocate-on-record to respond to Interlocutory Application No. 3 of 2013. Response may be filed within four weeks. List Interlocutory Application No. 3 of 2013 after four weeks.|(Rajesh Dham) | |(Renu Diwan) ||Court Master | |Court Master |

èITEM NO.19 COURT NO.5 SECTION XIV 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)....../2013 CC 13010/2013(From the judgement and order dated 30/01/2013 in CWP No.539/2013, of TheHIGH COURT OF DELHI AT N. DELHI)U.O.I & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUSA.D SURESH BABU Respondent(s)WITH I.A.1(With appln(s) for c/delay in filing SLP)Date: 22/07/2013 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE B.S. CHAUHAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.A. BOBDEFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Rakesh Kr. Khanna, ASG Ms. Saroj Bala, Adv. Mr. Virender Singh, Adv. Ms. Seema Rao, Adv. Mr. B. Krishna Prasad,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R It is submitted by Mr. Rakesh Kr. Khanna, learned ASG that once an inquiry has been held and the charges against the delinquent stand proved and he is served the second show cause, simultaneously the matter is sent to the Union Public Service Commission for its opinion, law does not require a copy of the recommendations/proposed punishment made by the Public Service Commission. However, in a given case if the disciplinary authority has taken a decision to impose a punishment and the second show cause notice is issued to the delinquent and simultaneously the opinion of the Public Service Commission is sought and the Commission proposes a more stringent punishment, whether in that case also, the delinquent would require a third show cause. -2- In view thereof, it may be necessary for us to examine as what was the proposed punishment of the disciplinary authority in the second show cause and what were the recommendations/proposed punishment of the Public Service Commission. Those documents may

be produced. List the matter after two weeks. (Deepak Mansukhani) (M.S. Negi) Court Master Court Master

æITEM NO.15 COURT NO.11 SECTION XVI 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)....../2013 CC 12800/2013(From the judgement and order dated 10/01/2013 in WPCT No.440/2012 of theHIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA)U.O.I & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUSSUBHASH CHANDRA SARKAR Respondent(s)(With I.A. NO.1 for c/delay in filing SLP)Date: 19/07/2013 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.L. GOKHALE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN B. LOKURFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Rakesh Kr. Khanna,ASG Ms. Saroj Bala,Adv. Mr. Ashok Kumar,Adv. Ms. Seema Rao,Adv. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Heard Mr. Khanna, learned Additional Solicitor General. He wants time to take instructions as to whether, in the facts of this case, advice of the UPSC will be required. Adjourned to 29th July, 2013. (A.S. BISHT) (SNEH LATA SHARMA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER

\206ITEM NO.4 COURT NO.12 SECTION XIV 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. 6575 OF 2012UNION OF INDIA & ANR Appellant (s) VERSUSR.K.SAREEN Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for directions and office report )Date: 15/07/2013 This Appeal was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.L. GOKHALE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN B. LOKURFor Appellant(s) Mr. Rakesh K.Khanna,ASG. Ms. Anjani Aiyagari,Adv. Ms. B.Sunita Rao,Adv. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal,Adv.For Respondent(s) Mrs Rani Chhabra,Adv. Ms. Priyanka Soni,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Adjourned to 29.7.2013. [SUMAN WADHWA] [SNEH LATA SHARMA] AR-cum-PS COURT MASTER

\ITEM NO.53 COURT NO.8 SECTION XVI 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)....../2013 CC 11266/2013(From the Judgment and order dated 23/7/2012 in OA No. 683 of 2007 OF THECENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, CALCUTTA)UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUSDIPTI BISWAS Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for c/delay in filing SLP and office report)WithC.A. No.6575 of 2012(With appln.(s) for Directions and Office Report)C.A. No.5133 of 2013Date: 08/07/2013 These Matters were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHARFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Rakesh K.Khanna, ASG, Ms. Saroj Bala, Adv. Mr. S.Singh, Adv. Mr. Shishir Singh, Adv. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal,Adv.For Respondent(s) Mrs. Rani Chhabra,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned. Issue notice. Tag with Civil Appeal Nos. 6394-95 of 2012. There shall be stay of the impugned order subject to the condition that the respondent-widow of the deceased employee shall be paid family -2- pension admissible to her under the Rules by computing the same on the basis of the pension of the employee having been reduced by 50%.|(Shashi Sareen) | (Veena Khera) || Court Master | Court Master |

ZITEM NO.23 COURT NO.8 SECTION XVI 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)....../2013 CC 11266/2013UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUSDIPTI BISWAS Respondent(s)With I.A No. 1 (appln(s) for c/delay in filing SLP and office report)Date: 05/07/2013 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHARFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Rakesh K. Khanna,ASG Ms. Saroj Bala,Adv. Mr. S. Singh,Adv. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal,Adv. Mr. Harsh Prabhakar,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Heard. Post on Monday, the 8th July, 2013 along with Civil Appeal No.6575 of 2012 and SLP(C)No.17799 of 2013.|(Mahabir Singh) | (Veena Khera) || Court Master | Court Master |

\210ITEM NO.17 COURT NO.12 SECTION XI 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).17799/2013(From the judgement and order dated 26/02/2013 in WPC No.251/2013 of TheHIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD)UOI & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUSJITENDRA SRIVASTAVA Respondent(s)(With prayer for interim relief and office report )Date: 02/07/2013 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.L. GOKHALE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN B. LOKURFor Petitioner(s) Mr. R.K.Khanna,ASG. Ms. Saroj Bala,Adv. Mr. Mohan Prasad Gupta,Adv. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal,Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Heard Mr. Rakesh K. Khanna, learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the petitioners. Leave granted. Hearing expedited. In the meanwhile, the order passed by the High Court shall remain stayed. Tag with C.A.No. 6575 of 2012 arising out of SLP(C)No. CC.14883 of 2012. [SUMAN WADHWA] [SNEH LATA SHARMA] AR-cum-PS COURT MASTER

8ITEM NO.10 COURT NO.3 SECTION XIV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil)....../2012 CC 14883/2012(From the judgment and order dated 24/01/2012 in WP No.476/2012 of TheHIGH COURT OF DELHI AT N. DELHI)UNION OF INDIA & ANR Petitioner(s) VERSUSR.K.SAREEN Respondent(s)WITH I.A. 1 (C/DELAY IN FILING SLP AND C/DELAY IN REFILING SLP AND OFFICEREPORT)Date: 14/09/2012 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.K. JAIN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN B. LOKURFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Rakesh Khanna, ASG Ms. B. Sunita Rao, Adv. Ms. Padma Laxmi Nigam, Adv. Ms. Anindita Popli, Adv. Mr. Anurag, Adv. for Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal, Adv.For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned. Leave granted. The appeal will be heard on the SLP Paper Book. Additional documents, if any, may be filed by the parties. Tag with Civil appeal Nos. 6394-6395 of 2012.|(VINOD LAKHINA) | |(KUSUM GULATI) ||COURT MASTER | |COURT MASTER |

\210ITEM NO.5 COURT NO.3 SECTION IX S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetitions for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) Nos.34343-34344/2011(From the judgment and order dated 03/05/2011 in SCA No.4803/2004 and SCANo.17416/2005 of The HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD)UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUSHARISHANKAR DIXIT Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for c/delay in filing SLP and exemption from filing c/c ofthe impugned Judgment)(FOR FINAL DISPOSAL)Date: 06/09/2012 These Petitions were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.K. JAIN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHARFor Petitioner(s) Ms. Indira Jaising, ASG Mr. S. Wasim A. Qadri, Adv. Ms. Manita Verma, Adv. Mr. Zaid Ali, Adv. Mr. S.N. Terdal, Adv. for Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, Adv.For Respondent(s) Mr. B.K.Satija, Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned. Leave granted. Hearing expedited. The appeals will be heard on the SLP Paper Books. Additional documents, if any, may be filed by the parties. |(VINOD LAKHINA) | |(KUSUM GULATI) ||COURT MASTER | |COURT MASTER |

dITEM NO.62 COURT NO.4 SECTION IX S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetitions for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) Nos.34343-34344/2011(From the judgement and order dated 03/05/2011 in SCANo.4803/2004,SCA No.17416/2005 of The HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT ATAHMEDABAD)UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUSHARI SHANKAR DIXIT Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for c/delay in filing SLP,exemption from filing c/cof the impugned Judgment)Date: 30/04/2012 These Petitions were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.K. JAIN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVEFor Petitioner(s) Ms. Indira Jai Singh, ASG Mr. S Wasim A Qadri, Adv. Ms. S Singh, Adv. Mr. B.K. Prsad, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma,Adv.-on-RecordFor Respondent(s) Mr. B.K.Satija,Adv.-on-Record UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List for final disposal on a non-miscellaneous day in the month of September, 2012. [ Charanjeet Kaur ] [ Kusum Gulati ] Court Master Court Master

ÆITEM NO.53 REGISTRAR COURT.1 SECTION IX 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 S.G. SHAHPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).34343-34344/2011UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUSHARI SHANKAR DIXIT Respondent(s)(With appln(s) for c/delay in filing SLP,exemption from filingc/c of the impugned Judgment)Date: 09/02/2012 These Petitions were called on for hearingtoday.For Petitioner(s) Ms. Fatima A., Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma,Adv.For Respondent(s) Mr. B.K.Satija,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R No request for filing counter affidavit. List before the Hon'ble Court, as per rules. (S.G. SHAH) REGISTRARrd

ÆITEM NO.MM-4A COURT NO.4 SECTION IX S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetitions for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil)....../2011 CC 20422-20423/2011(From the judgment and order dated 03/05/2011 in SCANo.4803/2004 and SCA No.17416/2005 of The HIGH COURT OF GUJARATAT AHMEDABAD)UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUSHARI SHANKAR DIXIT Respondent(s)WITH I.A. 1-2 (C/DELAY IN FILING SLP)Date: 02/12/2011 These Petitions were mentioned today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.K. JAIN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVEFor Petitioner(s) Ms. Indira Jaisingh, ASG Mr. S. Wasim A. Qadri, Adv. Ms. Shamshravish Revi, ADv. Ms. Samridhi Sinha, ADv. Mr. B.K. Prasad, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, Adv.(N/P)For Respondent(s) UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Issue notice on applications seeking condonation of delay as well as in the Special Leave Petitions. In view of the fact that the time granted for compliance with the impugned directions had expired long time back and these petitions are also belated, we are not inclined to grant any interim relief at this stage.(VINOD LAKHINA) (KUSUM GULATI) Court Master Court Master