ITEM NO.307 COURT NO.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 Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s).30335/2017 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 28-08-2017 in SA No.363/2017 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench] STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SHEO SHANKAR TEWARI Respondent(s) IA No. 158155/2021 - APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION IA No. 175080/2025 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 175535/2025 - EARLY HEARING APPLICATION IA No. 13988/2025 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 232270/2024 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 189113/2024 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 159063/2024 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION WITH SLP(C) No. 10241/2018 (XVI) SLP(C) No. 571/2019 (IV-B) SLP(C) No. 10766/2019 (XII) SLP(C) No. 15755/2019 (XII) Diary No(s). 261/2021 (XII) IA No. 12568/2021 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING SLP(C) No. 7409/2022 (IV-C) IA No. 60556/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT, IA No. 60558/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T., IA No.60557/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES Date : 23-02-2026 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JOYMALYA BAGCHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPUL M. PANCHOLI For Petitioner(s) :Mr. Karan Bharihoke, AOR Mr. Paramjit Singh Patwalia, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sanjay Kapur, AOR Mr. Surya Prakash, Adv. Ms. Shubhra Kapur, Adv. Ms. Mahima Kapur, Adv. Ms. Santha Smruthi, Adv. 1
Mr. Shadan Farasat, Sr. Adv. Mr. Swarnendu Chatterjee, AOR Mr. Ambuj Tiwari, Adv. Mr. Anubhav Yadav, Adv. Mr. Kaustav Chaturvedi, Adv. Ms. Harshita Rawat, Adv. Ms. Varisha Sharma, Adv. Mr. Rajivkumar, AOR Mr. Chandrika Prasad Mishra, Adv. Mr. Shambhu Nath Singh, Adv. Mr. Sanjeev Gupta, Adv. Mr. Vikramjit Banerjee, A.S.G. Mrs. Kiran Suri, Adv. Mrs. Aakanksha Kaul, Adv. Mrs. Manjula Gupta, Adv. Mr. B.k Satija, Adv. Mr. Amit Sharma B, Adv. Mr. Indira Bhakar, Adv. Mr. Merusagar Samantaray, Adv. Mr. Nring Chamurbo Zeliang, Adv. Mr. Hritik Pathak, Adv. Mr. Sahil Bhalotia, Adv. Mr. Amrish Kumar, AOR For Respondent(s) :Mr. Ranjan Mukherjee, AOR Mr. Satish Pandey, AOR Ms. Jay Jaimini Pandey, Adv. Mr. Dwaipayan Chatterjee, Adv. Mr. Sanjeet Kumar, Adv. Mr. Akbar Ali, Adv. Mr. Meghraj Singh, Adv. Mr. Mahendra Pratap Singh, Adv. Mr. Harendra Kumar Sharma, Adv. Mr. Braj Kishore Mishra, Adv. Mrs. Smriti Kumari, Adv. Mr. Sudhakar Dwidevi, Adv. Ms. Nidhi, AOR Mr. Arjun Garg, AOR Ms. Amruta Arjun Garg, Adv. Ms. Arushi Kulshrestha, Adv. Ms. Mrinmoyee Das, Adv. Mr. Sanjay Kapur, AOR Mr. Surya Prakash, Adv. Ms. Shubhra Kapur, Adv. Ms. Mahima Kapur, Adv. 2
Ms. Santha Smruthi, Adv. Ms. Aparna Jha, AOR Mr. Mithilesh Jha, Adv. Ms. Geeta Verma, Adv. Ms. Preeti Chauhan, Adv. Mr. Harisha S.R., AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R SLP(C) No. 7409/2022 1. Mr. Shadan Farasat, learned senior counsel for the petitioner, seeks and is permitted to withdraw this special leave petition with liberty to approach the High Court through a review petition. 2. Since the matter remained pending before this Court, we request the High Court not to dispose of the review petition on the ground of limitation and make an endeavour to decide the same at the earliest. 3. The Special Leave Petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as aforesaid. Rest of the matters 4. Post these matters on 30.04.2026. 5. The parties are directed to nominate their Nodal Counsel within three weeks. 6. The learned Nodal Counsel shall file the convenience compilation along with a brief note of submissions within six weeks. (ARJUN BISHT) (PREETHI T.C.) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 3
ITEM NO.34 COURT NO.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 Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 30335/2017 [Arising out of impugned judgment and order dated 28-08-2017 in SA No. 363/2017 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench] STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SHEO SHANKAR TEWARI Respondent(s) (IA No. 158155/2021 - APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION, IA No. 232270/2024 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION, IA No. 189113/2024 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION and IA No. 159063/2024 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION) WITH SLP(C) No. 10241/2018 (XVI) SLP(C) No. 571/2019 (IV-B) SLP(C) No. 10766/2019 (XII) SLP(C) No. 15755/2019 (XII) Diary No(s). 261/2021 (XII) (IA No. 12568/2021 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING) SLP(C) No. 7409/2022 (IV-C) (IA No. 60556/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT, IA No. 60558/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. and IA No. 60557/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ ANNEXURES) Date : 09-02-2026 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JOYMALYA BAGCHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.V. ANJARIA For Petitioner(s): Mr. Karan Bharihoke, AOR Ms. Zehra Khan, Adv. Mr. K. M. Natraj, A.S.G. Mr. Sanjay Kapur, AOR Mr. Surya Prakash, Adv. 1
Ms. Shubhra Kapur, Adv. Ms. Santha Smruthi, Adv. Mr. Shadan Farasat, Sr. Adv. Mr. Swarnendu Chatterjee, AOR Mr. Ambuj Tiwari, Adv. Mr. Anubhav Yadav, Adv. Mr. Kaustav Chaturvedi, Adv. Mr. Ali Abbas Masoodi, Adv. Ms. Varisha Sharma, Adv. Mr. Rajivkumar, AOR Mr. Binod Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Shambu Nath Singh, Adv. Mr. Sanjeev Gupta, Adv. Mr. Anurag Singh, Adv. Mr. Vikramjit Banerjee, A.S.G. Mrs. Kiran Suri, Adv. Mrs. Aakanksha Kaul, Adv. Mrs. Manjula Gupta, Adv. Mr. B.k Satija, Adv. Mr. Amit Sharma B, Adv. Mr. Indira Bhakar, Adv. Mr. Merusagar Samantaray, Adv. Mr. Amrish Kumar, AOR For Respondent(s): Mr. Ranjan Mukherjee, AOR Mr. Satish Pandey, AOR Mr. Akbar Ali, Adv. Ms. Jay Jaimini Pandey, Adv. Mr. Dwaipayan Chatterjee, Adv. Mr. Sanjeet Kumar, Adv. Ms. Harshika Tiwari, Adv. Mrs. Lalita Gupta, Adv. Dr. Nafis A Siddiqui, Adv. Ms. Nidhi, AOR Mr. Arjun Garg, AOR Ms. Amruta Arjun Garg, Adv. Ms. Arushi Kulshrestha, Adv. Mr. K.M. Natraj, A.S.G. Mr. Sanjay Kapur, AOR Mr. Surya Prakash, Adv. Ms. Shubhra Kapur, Adv. Ms. Santha Smruthi, Adv. Ms. Aparna Jha, AOR 2
Mr. Mithilesh Jha, Adv. Ms. Geeta Verma, Adv. Ms. Jessy Kurian, Adv. Ms. Ruby Md. Wasim, Adv. Mr. Harisha S.R., AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List on 23.02.2026. (NITIN TALREJA) (PREETHI T.C.) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 3
ITEM NO.810 COURT NO.3 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) No(s). 30335/2017 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 28-08-2017 in SA No. 363/2017 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench] STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SHEO SHANKAR TEWARI Respondent(s) [TO GO BEFORE THREE HON'BLE JUDGES] Date : 12-08-2025 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.K. MAHESHWARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sanjay Kapur, AOR For Respondent(s) : Mr. Satish Pandey, AOR Ms. Jay Jaimini Pandey, Adv. Ms. Surajita Pattanaik, Adv. Mr. Pratyush Nandan, Adv. Mr. Harisha S.r., AOR UPON mentioning, the Court made the following O R D E R 1. On being mentioned, the IA No. 175080/2025 (Application for direction) is taken on Board. 2. As per order dated 08.02.2019, the matter is required to be listed before a larger Bench. Therefore, the request can be made before the appropriate Bench. (GULSHAN KUMAR ARORA) (NAND KISHOR) AR-CUM-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
ITEM NO.109 COURT NO.6 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) No(s). 30335/2017 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 28-08-2017 in SA No. 363/2017 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench) STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SHEO SHANKAR TEWARI Respondent(s) ([ TO GO BEFORE THREE HON'BLE JUDGES ] IA No. 158155/2021 - APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION IA No. 232270/2024 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 189113/2024 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 159063/2024 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION) WITH SLP(C) No. 10241/2018, 571/2019, 10766/2019, 15755/2019 Diary No(s). 261/2021 (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No. 12568/2021 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING) SLP(C) No. 7409/2022 (IA No. 60556/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 60558/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 60557/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) Date : 06-11-2024 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY S. OKA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH For Petitioner(s) Mr. Karan Bharihoke, AOR Mr. P.S Patwalia, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sanjay Kapur, AOR Ms. Divya Singh Pundir, Adv. Mr. Arjun Bhatia, Adv. Ms. Mahima Kapur, Adv. 1
Mr. Swarnendu Chatterjee, AOR Mr. Rajivkumar, AOR Mr. J.K Mishra, Adv. Mr. Pradeep Kumar Dwivedi, Adv. Mr. Sandeep Pathak, Adv. Mr. Vikramjit Banerjee, A.S.G. Mrs. Kiran Suri, Adv. Mrs. Aakanksha Kaul, Adv. Mrs. Manjula Gupta, Adv. Mr. B.k Satija, Adv. Mr. Amrish Kumar, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Ranjan Mukherjee, AOR Mr. Satish Pandey, AOR Ms. Jay Jaimini Pandey, Adv. Ms. Surajita Pattanaik, Adv. Mr. Anirudh Bankura, Adv. Mr. Braj Kishore Mishra, Adv. Mr. Vijay Lakshmi, Adv. Ms. Lalita Gupta, Adv. Mr. Akbar Ali, Adv. Mrs. Sonia Mathur, Sr. Adv. Ms. Nidhi, AOR Mr. Arjun Garg, AOR Mr. Sanjay Kapur, AOR Ms. Divya Singh Pundir, Adv. Mr. Arjun Bhatia, Adv. Ms. Mahima Kapur, Adv. Ms. Aparna Jha, AOR Ms. Jessy Kurian, Adv. Mr. Harisha S.R., AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List on 19 th December, 2024. (ANITA MALHOTRA) (AVGV RAMU) AR-CUM-PS COURT MASTER 2
ITEM NO.103 COURT NO.6 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) No(s). 30335/2017 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 28-08-2017 in SA No. 363/2017 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench) STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SHEO SHANKAR TEWARI Respondent(s) ([ TO GO BEFORE THREE HON'BLE JUDGES ] IA No. 158155/2021 - APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION) WITH SLP(C) Nos.19331/2023, 10241/2018, 571/2019, 10766/2019, 15755/2019 Diary No(s). 261/2021 (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No. 12568/2021 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING) SLP(C) No. 7409/2022 (IA No. 60556/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 60558/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 60557/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) SLP(C) No. 19260/2023 Date : 31-07-2024 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY S. OKA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sanjay Kapur, AOR Ms. Divya Singh Pundir, Adv. Mrs. Shubhra Kapur, Adv. Ms. Mahima Kapur, Adv. Mr. Arjun Bhatia, Adv. Mr. Rajivkumar, AOR 1
Mrs. Aakanksha Kaul, Adv. Mrs. Manjula Gupta, Adv. Mr. B.K Satija, Adv. Mr. Amrish Kumar, AOR Mr. Karan Bharihoke, AOR Ms. Praveena Gautam, AOR Mr. Pawan Shukla, Adv. Ms. Kanika Kalyan, Adv. Ms. Akanksha Tyagi, Adv. Mr. Swarnendu Chatterjee, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Devendra Kumar Shukla, AOR Mr. Rakesh Kumar Tewari, Adv. Mr. Bhupendra Pratap Singh, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Kumar Suman, Adv. Mr. Aditya Mishra, Adv. Ms. Vijay Rani, Adv. Mr. T N Saxena, Adv. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Yogesh Kaushik, Adv. Mr. Rishi Raj Bhardwaj, Adv. Mr. Puneet Bholla, Adv. Mr. Mool Chand Pareva, Adv. Mr. Harpreet Singh, Adv. Mr. Rajinder Singh, Adv. For M/S. Mukesh Kumar Singh And Co., AOR Mr. Sanjay Kapur, AOR Ms. Divya Singh Pundir, Adv. Mr. Arjun Bhatia, Adv. Ms. Mahima Kapur, Adv. Ms. Aparna Jha, AOR Mr. Abhishek Yadav, Adv. Ms. Priyanka Mathur, Adv. Ms. Ipsita Behura, Adv. Ms. Geeta Verma, Adv. Ms. Jessy Kurian, Adv. Ms. Rekha Rani, Adv. Ms. Preeti Chauhan, Adv. Mr. Ranjan Mukherjee, AOR 2
Mr. Satish Pandey, AOR Mr. Manoj Selvaraj,Adv. Ms. Jay Jaimini Pandey, Adv. Mr. Braj Kishore Mishra, Adv. Mr. Mahendra Pratap Singh, Adv. Mr. Nitin Verma, Adv. Ms. Apurwa Kumari, Adv. Ms. Pratibha, Adv. Mr. Prayag Datt Joshi, Adv. Ms. Deepika Rathore, Adv. Ms. Nidhi, AOR Mr. Syed Saifullah, Adv. Mr. Sarthak Arora, Adv. Mr. Arjun Garg, AOR Mr. Aakash Nandolia, Adv. Ms. Sagun Srivastava, Adv. Ms. Kriti Gupta, Adv. Mr. Manoj Kumar Dwivedi,Adv. Mr. Reepak kansal,Adv. Mr. Gopal Sharan Pathak,Adv. Mr. Harisha S.R., AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R SLP(Civil)Nos.19331 and 19260 of 2023 The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw these petitions in view of the subsequent developments. Accordingly, the Special Leave Petitions are disposed of as withdrawn. Rest of the matters We appoint Advocate-on-Record for the petitioners and Advocate-on-Record for the first respondent in SLP(Civil)No.30335/2017 as the Nodal Officers who shall file a common compilation of the documents and relied upon decisions within a period of two months from today. 3
The submissions in brief limited to 7 pages shall be filed within a period of two months from today. To be listed on 6 th November, 2024. (ANITA MALHOTRA) (AVGV RAMU) AR-CUM-PS COURT MASTER 4
ITEM NO.48 COURT NO.14 SECTION IV-B 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) No(s). 571/2019 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 31-07-2018 in LPA No. 1575/2015 passed by the High Court Of Punjab & Haryana At Chandigarh) THE CHAIRMAN, PUNJAB STATE POWER CORPORATION LIMITED (PREVIOUSLY PUNJAB STATE ELECTRICITY CORPORATION & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SANJEEV KUMAR & ANR. Respondent(s) Date : 21-08-2023 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL For Petitioner(s) Ms. Zehra Khan, Adv. Mr. Karan Bharihoke, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Ranjan Mukherjee, AOR Ms. Aayushi, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the court made the following O R D E R 1. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that issue regarding date of application of the scheme of compassionate appointment has been referred to a 3-Judges’ Bench in SLP (Civil) No.30335 of 2017 titled “ State Bank of India and Others vs. Sheo Shankar Tewari ” 1 . 2. Tag along with Petition for Special Leave To Appeal (Civil) No.30335 of 2017. (Geeta Ahuja) (Nand Kishor) Assistant Registrar-cum-PS Court Master (NSH) 1 (2019) 5 SCC 600
ITEM NO.108 COURT NO.3 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) No. 30335/2017 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 28-08-2017 in SA No. 363/2017 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench) STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SHEO SHANKAR TEWARI Respondent(s) [ TO GO BEFORE THREE HON'BLE JUDGES ] WITH SLP(C) No. 15755/2019 (XII) SLP(C) No. 10241/2018 (XVI) Diary No(s). 261/2021 (XII) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.12568/2021-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING) SLP(C) No. 10766/2019 (XII) SLP(C) No. 7409/2022 (IV-C) (IA No. 60556/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No. 60558/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. and IA No. 60557/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) Date : 27-04-2023 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.M. JOSEPH HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V. NAGARATHNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sanjay Kapur, AOR Ms. Megha Karnwal, Adv. Mr. Surya Prakash, Adv. Mr. Arjun Bhatia, Adv. Mr. Swarnendu Chatterjee, AOR Mr. Yashwardhan Singh Adv, Adv. Ms. Megha Saha Adv, Adv. 1
Ms. Deepakshi Garg, Adv. Mr. Rajivkumar, AOR Mr. Sanjeev Gupta, Adv. Mr. Pradeep Dewidi, Adv. Mr. Anil Nishani, Adv. Mr. Ugarnath Kumar, Adv. Ms. Madhvi Divan, A.S.G. Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker, AOR Dr. Arun Kumar Yadav, Adv. Mr. Amit Sharma B, Adv. Ms. Vaishali Verma, Adv. Ms. Indira Bhakar, Adv. Mr. B K Satija, Adv. Mr. Merusagar Samantray, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Satish Pandey, AOR Mr. Anirudh Bankura, Adv. Ms. Megha Singh, Adv. Mr. Akbar Ali, Adv. Ms. Nidhi, AOR Mr. Mohit Girdhar, Adv. Mr. Arjun Garg, AOR Mr. Aakash Nandolia, Adv. Ms. Sagun Srivastava, Adv. Mr. Sanjay Kapur, AOR Ms. Megha Karnwal, Adv. Mr. Surya Prakash, Adv. Mr. Arjun Bhatia, Adv. Ms. Aparna Jha, AOR Mr. Abhishek Yadav, Adv. Ms. Ipsita Behura, Adv. Ms. Pooja Singh, Adv. Ms. Geeta Verma, Adv. Ms. Jessy Kurian, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List on 03 rd May, 2023. (NIDHI AHUJA) (RENU KAPOOR) AR-cum-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 2
ITEM NO.34 COURT NO.12 SECTION IV-C S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.7409/2022 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 27-02-2020 in WP No. 18610/2017 passed by the High Court of M.P Principal Seat at Jabalpur) RAKESH DUBEY Petitioner(s) VERSUS DISTRICT AND SESSION JUDGE JABALPUR Respondent(s) (IA No. 60556/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT, IA No. 60558/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. AND IA No. 60557/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) Date : 21-03-2023 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Siddharth Bhatnagar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Swarnendu Chatterjee, AOR Mr. Ambuj Tiwari, Adv. Prachetukar, Adv. Mr. Aditya Sidhra, Adv. Nadeem Afroz, Adv. Mr. Yashwardhan Singh, Adv. Ms. Deepakshi Garg, Adv. Ms. Megha Saha, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Arjun Garg, AOR Mr. Aakash Nandolia, Adv. Ms. Sagun Srivastava, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The issue relating to the question raised in this petition has been referred for consideration to the larger Bench of three Judges, through the order dated 08.02.2019 in SLP (C) No.30335 of 2017 reported in (2019) 5 SCC 600. 1
SLP (C) No.7409/2022 In that view, this petition be tagged alongwith the said petition for an appropriate consideration. The framing of the additional question if need be, may be addressed to the larger Bench to be included for answering the reference. (RAJNI MUKHI) (DIPTI KHURANA) COURT MASTER (SH) ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 2
ITEM NO.45 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION IV-C 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 SH. S.P.S. LALER Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 7409/2022 RAKESH DUBEY Petitioner(s) VERSUS DISTRICT AND SESSION JUDGE JABALPUR Respondent(s) Date : 08-09-2022 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Swarnendu Chatterjee, AOR Mr. Yashwardhan Singh,Adv. Ms. Deepakshi Garg,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Arjun Garg, AOR Mr. Aakash Nandolia,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel through Video Conference, the Court made the following O R D E R The office report indicates sole respondent has already filed the counter affidavit. Viewed thus, the matter shall be processed for listing before the Hon'ble Court, under the rules. S.P.S. LALER Registrar MG
SLP(C) 7409/2022 1 ITEM NO.13 COURT NO.4 SECTION IV-C 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) No.7409/2022 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 27-02-2020 in WP No.18610/2017 passed by the High Court of M.P. Principal Seat at Jabalpur) RAKESH DUBEY Petitioner(s) VERSUS DISTRICT AND SESSION JUDGE JABALPUR Respondent(s) (With I.R. and IA No.60556/2022-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.60558/2022-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. and IA No.60557/2022-PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/ FACTS/ANNEXURES) Date : 29-04-2022 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Siddharth Bhatnagar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Swarnendu Chatterjee, AOR Mr. Himanshu Nailwal, Adv. Mr. Ambuj Tiwari, Adv. Ms. Pracheta Kar, Adv. Mr. Aditya Sidhra, Adv. Mr. Nadeem Afroz, Adv. For Respondent(s)
SLP(C) 7409/2022 2 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R 1 Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that though the circular dated 10 June 1994 providing for appointment on compassionate basis in favour of any one member of the employees family where the employee had retired voluntarily on medical basis was withdrawn on 3 January 1995 and the appointment of the petitioner was made thereafter on 9 March 1995, the application for the grant of compassionate appointment was made on 6 December 1994. Hence, it has been submitted that since the application was made on 6 December 1994 under the policy which was then in existence, the subsequent decision of the policy will not affect the rights of the petitioner. 2 In the present case, it has been submitted that the services of the petitioner were terminated after he had worked for over 21 years in October 2017. 3 Issue notice, returnable in six weeks. 4 Liberty to serve the Standing Counsel for the State of Madhya Pradesh, in addition. 5 No recovery shall be made from the petitioner in the meantime. (CHETAN KUMAR) (SAROJ KUMARI GAUR) A.R.-cum-P.S. Court Master
ITEM NO.34 Court 10 (Video Conferencing) SECTION XII 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) No. 10766/2019 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 03-07-2018 in WP No. 9484/2017 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras) THE UNION OF INDIA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAMPATH KUMAR Respondent(s) Date : 26-11-2021 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.M. JOSEPH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA For Petitioner(s) Ms. Madhavi Divan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker, AOR Ms. Kiran Suri, Adv. Ms. Aakanksha Kaul, Adv. Ms. Manjula Gupta, Adv. Mr. B. K. Satija, Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Learned Additional Solicitor General has brought to our notice that the issue involved in this case has been referred to larger Bench in SLP (C)No. 30335/2017. Let paperbooks of the case be placed before Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India for getting necessary orders for posting the matter before the larger Bench along with SLP (C)No. 30335/2017 . (NIDHI AHUJA) (RENU KAPOOR) AR-cum-PS BRANCH OFFICER
ITEM NO.11 Court 8 (Video Conferencing) SECTION XII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No(s).261/2021 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 10-04-2019 in WP No.28451/2018 10-04-2019 in WMP No. 33185/2018 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At Madras) UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS DINESH KUMAR Respondent(s) (With appls. for c/delay in filing SLP) Date : 12-02-2021 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. NAGESWARA RAO HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT For Petitioner(s) Ms. Madhavi Diwan, ASG Mr. Merusagar Samantray, Adv. Mr. B.K Satija, Adv. Mr. Gurmeet Singh Ma kker, AOR For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Issue notice on the application for condonation of delay as well as on the Special Leave petition. Tag along with SLP (C)No.15755 of 2019. (B.Parvathi) (Anand Prakash) Court Master Court Master
ITEM NO.17 Court 5 (Video Conferencing) SECTION XII 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) No(s). 15755/2019 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 27-08-2018 in WP No. 434/2018 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At Madras) UNION OF INDIA & ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUS R. VASANTH Respondent(s) Date : 05-11-2020 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. NAGESWARA RAO HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI For Petitioner(s) Ms. Madhvi Divan, ASG Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker, AOR Mr. Amit Sharma, Adv. Ms. Vaishali Verma, Adv. Ms. Indira Bhakad, Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Nidhi, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List after two weeks. Tag with SLP (Civil) No.30335/2017. The Registry is directed to tag other similar matters along with SLP (Civil) No.30335/2017, if any. (Geeta Ahuja) (Anand Prakash) Court Master Court Master
ITEM NO.25 Court 8 (Video Conferencing) SECTION XII 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) No(s).15755/2019 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 27-08-2018 in WP No.434/2018 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At Madras) UNION OF INDIA & ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUS R. VASANTH Respondent(s) Date : 12-10-2020 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. NAGESWARA RAO HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI For Petitioner(s) Ms. Madhvi Divan,ASG Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker, AOR Mr. Amit Sharma,Adv. Ms. Vaishali Verma,Adv. Ms. Indira Bhakad,Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Nidhi, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R As prayed for, list on 05.11.2020. (B.Parvathi) (Anand Prakash) Court Master Court Master
ITEM NO.21 Court 5 (Video Conferencing) SECTION XII 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) No(s).15755/2019 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 27-08-2018 in WP No.434/2018 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At Madras) UNION OF INDIA & ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUS R. VASANTH Respondent(s) Date : 05-10-2020 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. NAGESWARA RAO HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI For Petitioner(s) Ms. Madhvi Divan, ASG Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker, AOR Mr. amit Sharma, Adv. Ms. Vaishali Verma, Adv. Ms. Indira Bhakad, Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Nidhi, AOR Mr. Jaydip Patil,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List next week. (B.Parvathi) (Anand Prakash) Court Master Court Master
ITEM NO.28 Court 6 (Video Conferencing) SECTION XII 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) No(s). 15755/2019 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 27-08-2018 in WP No. 434/2018 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At Madras) UNION OF INDIA & ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUS R. VASANTH Respondent(s) Date : 28-08-2020 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. NAGESWARA RAO HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT For Petitioner(S) Ms. Madhvi Divan, ASG Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker, AOR Mr. Amit Sharma, Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Nidhi, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List on 21.09.2020. (Geeta Ahuja) (Anand Prakash) Court Master Court Master
ITEM NO.39 COURT NO.9 SECTION XII 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) No(s). 15755/2019 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 27-08-2018 in WP No. 434/2018 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At Madras) UNION OF INDIA & ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUS R. VASANTH Respondent(s) ) Date : 14-02-2020 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. NAGESWARA RAO HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA For Petitioner(s) Ms. Madhvi Divan, ASG Mr. Amit Sharma, Adv. Mr. Vijay Prakash, Adv. Mr. Vaishali Verma Adv. Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker, AOR For Respondent(s) Ms. Nidhi, AOR Mr. Vaisal D., Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List on 27 th March, 2020. In the meantime, rejoinder, if any be filed. (NEELAM GULATI) (ANAND PRAKASH) AR CUM PS BRANCH OFFICER
ITEM NO.21 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION XII 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 SH. ANIL LAXMAN PANSARE Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 10766/2019 THE UNION OF INDIA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAMPATH KUMAR Respondent(s) Date : 05 - 02 - 2020 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr Pranaya Kumar Mohapatra, Adv. Mr Pawan Kumar, Adv. Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker, AOR For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Service is complete on the sole respondent but none has entered appearance. Registry to process the matter for listing before the Hon'ble Court as per rules. ANIL LAXMAN PANSARE Registrar
ITEM NO.33 COURT NO.9 SECTION XII 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) No(s).15755/2019 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 27-08-2018 in WP No.434/2018 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At Madras) UNION OF INDIA & ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUS R.VASANTH Respondent(s) Date : 09-01-2020 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. NAGESWARA RAO HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA For Petitioner(s) Ms. Madhavi Divan,ASG Ms. Vaishali Verma,Adv. Mr. Sahil Monga,Adv. Mr. Vijay Prakash,Adv. Mr. Amit Sharma,Adv. Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker, AOR For Respondent(s) Ms. Nidhi, AOR Mr. Vaisal Dathan,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R As prayed, list on 14.02.2020. (B.Parvathi) (Anand Prakash) Court Master Court Master
ITEM NO.31 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION IV-B 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 SH. RAJIV KALRA Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 571/2019 THE CHAIRMAN, PUNJAB STATE POWER CORPORATION LIMITED (PREVIOUSLY PUNJAB STATE ELECTRICITY CORPORATI & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SANJEEV KUMAR & ANR. Respondent(s) Date : 12-12-2019 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Karan Bharihoke, AOR Ms. Zehra Khan,Adv. Mr. Siddhant Sharma,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Ranjan Mukherjee, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Appearance: None present on behalf of the petitioner. None present on behalf of the respondent. S ervice of notice is complete qua respondent No.2 but no one has entered appearance on his behalf. Four weeks’ time, as last chance is given to respondent No. 1 to file counter affidavit. After expiry of four weeks’, list the matter before the Hon'ble Court. RAJIV KALRA Registrar MG
ITEM NO.54 COURT NO.17 SECTION XVI 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) No(s).10241/2018 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 01-11-2017 in CWJC No.3075/2010 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Patna) MOSTT. ASHA DEVI (DECEASED) THROUGH HER LRS PETITIONER(S) VERSUS STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) Date : 08-11-2019 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDU MALHOTRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI For Petitioner(s) Mr.Rajiv Kumar, Adv. Mr.Sanjeev Gupta, Adv. Mr.Prabhoo Dayal Tiwari, Adv. Mrs.Kusum Chaudhary, Adv. Mr.Raj Mohan Gupta, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr.Sanjay Kapur, Adv. Mr.Bharath Gangadharan, Adv. Mr.Harshal Narayan, Adv. Ms.Shubhra Kapur, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Tag with S.L.P. (C) No.30335 of 2017. List these matters on a Non-miscellaneous day after two weeks. (Ashok Raj Singh) (Beena Jolly) Court Master Court Master
ITEM NO.43 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION XII 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 SH. ANIL LAXMAN PANSARE Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 10766/2019 THE UNION OF INDIA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAMPATH KUMAR Respondent(s) Date : 08-11-2019 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Ajai Kumar Bhatia, Adv. Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker, AOR For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay in filing fresh particulars is condoned. Notice be issued immediately. List again on 5.2.2020. ANIL LAXMAN PANSARE Registrar
ITEM NO.78 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION XII 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 SURINDER S. RATHI Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 15755/2019 UNION OF INDIA & ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUS R. VASANTH Respondent(s) Date : 30-08-2019 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker, AOR (Not Present) Mr. Dhawal Uniyal, Adv. (Present) For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Service of notice is complete on the Sole Respondent but no one has chosen to enter appearance on his behalf. Viewed thus, the matter shall be processed for listing before the Hon'ble Court as per rules. SURINDER S. RATHI Registrar PM
ITEM NO.22 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION IV-B 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 SURINDER S. RATHI Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 571/2019 THE CHAIRMAN, PUNJAB STATE POWER CORPORATION LIMITED (PREVIOUSLY PUNJAB STATE ELECTRICITY CORPORATI & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SANJEEV KUMAR & ANR. Respondent(s) (FOR ADMISSION ) Date : 21-08-2019 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Karan Bharihoke, AOR Mr. Siddhant Sharma, Adv. Ms. Navkiran Bolay, Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Service of notice is complete on Respondent No. 2 but no one has chosen to enter appearance on his behalf. Respondent No. 1 is granted four weeks’ time, to file the counter affidavit. List again on 12.12.2019. SURINDER S. RATHI Registrar pm
ITEM NO.86 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION XII 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 ANIL LAXMAN PANSARE Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 10766/2019 THE UNION OF INDIA Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAMPATH KUMAR Respondent(s) Date : 24-07-2019 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Praneet Pranav, Adv. Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker, AOR For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Ld. Counsel for the petitioner to take fresh steps alongwith fresh particulars of the sole respondent within two weeks. List again on 8.11.2019. ANIL LAXMAN PANSARE Registrar
ITEM NO.19 COURT NO.12 SECTION XII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No(s). 21211/2019 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 27-08- 2018 in WP No. 434/2018 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At Madras) UNION OF INDIA & ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUS R. VASANTH Respondent(s) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.91417/2019-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING ) Date : 05-07-2019 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. NAGESWARA RAO HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA For Petitioner(s) Ms. Madhavi Divan, ASG Mr. Vijay Prakash, Adv. Mr. Amit Sharma, Adv. Mr. Amrish Kumar Sharma, Adv. Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker, AOR For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned. Issue notice. (GEETA AHUJA) (SUNIL KUMAR RAJVANSHI) COURT MASTER (SH) BRANCH OFFICER
ITEM NO.18 COURT NO.12 SECTION XII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No(s). 10133/2019 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 03-07-2018 in WP No. 9484/2017 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At Madras) UNION OF INDIA & Ors. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAMPATH KUMAR Respondent(s) (FOR I.R. and IA No.55392/2019-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING ) Date : 08-04-2019 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK BHUSHAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.M. JOSEPH For Petitioner(s) Ms. Aakanksha Kaul, Adv. Ms. Manjula Gupta, Adv. Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker, AOR For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned. Issue notice. (MEENAKSHI KOHLI) (RENU KAPOOR) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER
ITEM NO.57 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION IV-B 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 RAJESH KUMAR GOEL Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 571/2019 THE CHAIRMAN, PUNJAB STATE POWER CORPORATION LIMITED (PREVIOUSLY PUNJAB STATE ELECTRICITY CORPORATI & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SANJEEV KUMAR & ANR. Respondent(s) (FOR ADMISSION ) Date : 03-04-2019 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Zahid Laiq Ahmed,Adv. Ms. Zehra Khan,Adv. Mr. Karan Bharihoke, AOR Mr. B.D. Das,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R S ervice of notice is complete qua respondent No.2 but no one has entered appearance on his behalf. As per postal tracking report, notice issued to respondent No.1 has been received back with postal remarks “Insufficient Address”. Hence, learned counsel for petitioners shall within a period of four weeks’ file the fresh particulars of the said respondent and he shall also take requisite steps for the service of notice upon him. List again on 21.8.2019. RAJESH KUMAR GOEL Registrar MG
ITEM NO.1501 COURT NO.8 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 for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.30335/2017 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 28-08-2017 in SA No.363/2017 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At Allahabad, Lucknow Bench) STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SHEO SHANKAR TEWARI Respondent(s) Date : 08-02-2019 This petition was called on for pronouncement of Order today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sanjay Kapur, AOR Mr. Bharath Gangadharan, Adv. Ms. Megha Karnwal, Adv. Ms. Mansi Kapur, Adv. Ms. Shubhra Kapur, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Santosh Kumar Tripathi, AOR Hon’ble Mr. Justice Uday Umesh Lalit pronounced the reportable order of the Bench comprising His Lordship and Hon’ble Ms. Justice Indu Malhotra. The Court inter alia passed the following order: “9. ... The matter therefore requires consideration by a larger Bench of at least three Hon’ble Judges of this Court. 10. We, therefore, request the Registry to place the papers of this case before the Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India for constituting a Bench of appropriate strength to dispose of the present petition. 11. Ordered accordingly.” (MUKESH KUMAR) (SUMAN JAIN) COURT MASTER BRANCH OFFICER (Signed Reportable Order is placed on the File)
SLP(C)No.30335 of 2017 State Bank of India and ors. Vs. Sheo Shankar Tewari 1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL)NO.30335 OF 2017 STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS. ……Petitioners VERSUS SHEO SHANKAR TEWARI ..…. Respondent O R D E R Uday Umesh Lalit, J. 1. The father of the respondent was working with the petitioner-bank and while in service died on 11.11.2004. A request was made for appointment on compassionate grounds by the respondent on 03.03.2005. As on that date, compassionate appointment could be granted to the dependents of employees dying in harness. However, instructions were issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance on 14.07.2004 to frame an appropriate scheme for payment of monetary assistance in lieu of compassionate appointment. Vide
SLP(C)No.30335 of 2017 State Bank of India and ors. Vs. Sheo Shankar Tewari 2 its communication dated 31.07.2004 the IBA 1 had advised the banks to frame their own schemes based on said model. 2. Before the application of the respondent could be considered, the petitioner-bank formally approved a scheme for payment of ex-gratia lumpsum amount in lieu of compassionate appointment vide its scheme circulated on 04.08.2005. The relevant clause namely Clause 15(vi) provided:- “With effect from the date the “SBI Scheme for payment of ex-gratia lumpsum amount” comes into force the bank’s scheme of compassionate appointments shall be deemed abolished/withdrawn and no request for compassionate appointment shall be entertained or considered by the bank under any circumstance.” 3. According to the petitioner-bank, the application of the respondent for compassionate appointment could not therefore be considered. The challenge to the action on part of the bank by way of Writ Petition was accepted by the Single Judge and the Division Bench of the High Court which decisions are presently in appeal. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner-bank relied upon the decision of this Court in State Bank of India and another vs. Raj Kumar 2 and particularly paragraphs 2, 8, 12 and 13 which are to the following effect:- 1
Indian Banks’ Association 2
(2010) 11 SCC 661
SLP(C)No.30335 of 2017 State Bank of India and ors. Vs. Sheo Shankar Tewari 3 “ 2. The respondent’s father employed as a Messenger in the appellant Bank, died on 1-10-2004. The respondent’s mother made applications dated 6- 6-2005 and 14-6-2005 requesting for his appointment on compassionate grounds. When the applications were being processed and verified, the Compassionate Appointment Scheme was substituted by the “SBI Scheme for payment of ex gratia lump sum amount” with effect from 4-8-2005. The new Scheme abolished the old Scheme for compassionate appointments and instead provided for payment of an ex gratia lump sum amount as per its terms. … … … 8. It is now well settled that appointment on compassionate grounds is not a source of recruitment. On the other hand it is an exception to the general rule that recruitment to public services should be on the basis of merit, by an open invitation providing equal opportunity to all eligible persons to participate in the selection process. The dependants of employees, who die in harness, do not have any special claim or right to employment, except by way of the concession that may be extended by the employer under the rules or by a separate scheme, to enable the family of the deceased to get over the sudden financial crisis. The claim for compassionate appointment is therefore traceable only to the scheme framed by the employer for such employment and there is no right whatsoever outside such scheme. An appointment under the scheme can be made only if the scheme is in force and not after it is abolished/withdrawn. It follows therefore that
SLP(C)No.30335 of 2017 State Bank of India and ors. Vs. Sheo Shankar Tewari 4 when a scheme is abolished, any pending application seeking appointment under the scheme will also cease to exist, unless saved. The mere fact that an application was made when the scheme was in force, will not by itself create a right in favour of the applicant. … … … 12. Obviously, therefore, there can be no immediate or automatic appointment merely on an application. Several circumstances having a bearing on eligibility, and financial condition, up to the date of consideration may have to be taken into account. As none of the applicants under the scheme has a vested right, the scheme that is in force when the application is actually considered, and not the scheme that was in force earlier when the application was made, will be applicable. 13. Further, where the earlier scheme is abolished and the new scheme which replaces it specifically provides that all pending applications will be considered only in terms of the new scheme, then the new scheme alone will apply. As compassionate appointment is a concession and not a right, the employer may wind up the scheme or modify the scheme at any time depending upon its policies, financial capacity and availability of posts.” 5. He also relied upon the decision of this Court in MGB Gramin Bank vs. Chakrawarti Singh 3 . Paragraphs 2, 15 and 16 of said decision are as under: 3
(2014) 13 SCC 583
SLP(C)No.30335 of 2017 State Bank of India and ors. Vs. Sheo Shankar Tewari 5 “2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to this appeal are that: the father of the respondent who was working as a Class III employee with the appellant Bank died on 19-4-2006 while in harness. The respondent applied for compassionate appointment on 12-5-2006. During the pendency of the application filed by the respondent, a new scheme dated 12-6- 2006 came into force with effect from 6-10-2006. Clause 14 thereof provides that all applications pending on the date of commencement of the scheme shall be considered for grant of ex gratia payment to the family instead of compassionate appointment. … … … 15. The Court considered various aspects of service jurisprudence and came to the conclusion that as the appointment on compassionate ground may not be claimed as a matter of right nor an applicant becomes entitled automatically for appointment, rather it depends on various other circumstances i.e. eligibility and financial conditions of the family, etc. the application has to be considered in accordance with the scheme. In case the scheme does not create any legal right, a candidate cannot claim that his case is to be considered as per the scheme existing on the date the cause of action had arisen i.e. death of the incumbent on the post. In SBI vs. Raj Kumar 2 , this Court held that in such a situation, the case under the new scheme has to be considered. 16. In view of the above position, the reasoning given by the learned Single Judge 4 as well as by the Division Bench 5 is not sustainable in the eye of the 4
Chakrawarti Singh vs. Marwar Ganganagar Bikaner Gramin Bank, Civil Writ Petition No.7869 of 2008, decided on 27.7.2009 (Raj.) 5
MGB Gramin Bank vs. Chakrawarti Singh, Civil Special Appeal (W)No.798 of 2009, decided on 27.1.2010 (Raj.)
SLP(C)No.30335 of 2017 State Bank of India and ors. Vs. Sheo Shankar Tewari 6 law. The appeal is allowed and the impugned judgments 4 & 5 of the High Court are set aside.” 6. On the other hand, reliance was placed by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent on the decision in Canara Bank and another vs. M. Mahesh Kumar 6 . Paragraphs 11, 12, 17 and 22 of this decision are:- “ 11. During the pendency of the matter before the Division Bench, Indian Banks Association (for short “IBA”) formulated a scheme based on the guidelines issued by the Government of India. As per the said Scheme, the banks have scrapped the scheme of compassionate appointment and introduced the new scheme of ex gratia payment in lieu of compassionate appointment by HO Circular No. 35 of 2005 dated 14-2-2005. According to appellant Bank, as on date of consideration of the application for compassionate appointment, there was no policy to provide compassionate appointment under “Dying in Harness Scheme”. It is therefore the contention of the Bank that the new 2005 Scheme applies to all pending applications for appointment on compassionate ground, the respondent’s case could not be considered and as per the new Scheme, they are only entitled to ex gratia payment in lieu of compassionate appointment. 12. The main question falling for consideration is whether the Scheme passed in 2005 providing for ex gratia payment or the Scheme then in vogue in 1993 providing for compassionate appointment is applicable to the respondent. 6
(2015) 7 SCC 412
SLP(C)No.30335 of 2017 State Bank of India and ors. Vs. Sheo Shankar Tewari 7 … … … 17. Applying these principles to the case in hand, as discussed earlier, the respondent’s father died on 10- 10-1998 while he was serving as a clerk in the appellant Bank and the respondent applied timely for compassionate appointment as per the scheme “Dying in Harness Scheme” dated 8-5-1993 which was in force at that time. The appellant Bank rejected the respondent’s claim on 30-6-1999 recording that there are no indigent circumstances for providing employment to the respondent. Again on 7-11-2001, the appellant Bank sought for particulars in connection with the issue of the respondent’s employment. In the light of the principles laid down in the above decisions, the cause of action to be considered for compassionate appointment arose when Circular No. 154 of 1993 dated 8-5-1993 was in force. Thus, as per the judgment referred in SBI vs. Jaspal Kaur case 7 , the claim cannot be decided as per 2005 Scheme providing for ex gratia payment. The Circular dated 14-2-2005 being an administrative or executive order cannot have retrospective effect so as to take away the right accrued to the respondent as per Circular of 1993. … … … 22. Considering the scope of the scheme “Dying in Harness Scheme 1993” then in force and the facts and circumstances of the case, the High Court rightly directed the appellant Bank to reconsider the claim of the respondent for compassionate appointment in accordance with law and as per the Scheme (1993) then in existence. We do not find any reason warranting interference.” 7
(2007) 9 SCC 571
SLP(C)No.30335 of 2017 State Bank of India and ors. Vs. Sheo Shankar Tewari 8 7. In these decisions, the original scheme under which appointment on compassionate grounds could be made, was substituted by one under which only ex gratia payment would be made over to the dependants. The decisions relied upon by the petitioner proceed on the premise that there is no vested right to have the matter considered under the former scheme and the governing scheme would be one which was in force when the applications came up for consideration. On the other hand, the decision relied upon by the respondent proceeds on a different principle and stipulates that the governing scheme would be the former scheme and any subsequent that came into force after the claim was raised would not be applicable. The decision of this Court in Canara Bank 6 did notice the earlier two decisions in State Bank of India 2 and MGB Gramin Bank 3 . 8. All the aforesaid three decisions as well as one in Jaspal Kaur 7 were rendered by Benches of two Hon’ble Judges of this Court. 9. The principles emanating from these two lines of decisions, in our considered view are not consistent and do not reconcile. The matter
SLP(C)No.30335 of 2017 State Bank of India and ors. Vs. Sheo Shankar Tewari 9 therefore requires consideration by a larger Bench of at least three Hon’ble Judges of this Court. 10. We, therefore, request the Registry to place the papers of this case before the Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India for constituting a Bench of appropriate strength to dispose of the present petition. 11. Ordered accordingly. ………..…..……..……J. (Uday Umesh Lalit) ..………….……………J. (Indu Malhotra) New Delhi, February 8, 2019
ITEM NO.54 COURT NO.8 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 for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.30335/2017 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 28-08-2017 in SA No.363/2017 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At Allahabad, Lucknow Bench) STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SHEO SHANKAR TEWARI Respondent(s) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R.) Date : 01-02-2019 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDU MALHOTRA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sanjay Kapur, AOR Mr. Bharath Gangadharan, Adv. Ms. Megha Karnwal, Adv. Ms. Mansi Kapur, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Satish Pandey, Adv. Mr. Sanjay Kumar Visen, Adv. Mr. Santosh Kumar Tripathi, AOR Mr. Rajesh Maurya, Adv. Ms. Ritu Rastogi, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Heard learned counsel for the parties. Order reserved. (MUKESH NASA) (SUMAN JAIN) COURT MASTER BRANCH OFFICER
ITEM NO.4 COURT NO.8 SECTION IV-B 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) No(s). 571/2019 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 31-07-2018 in LPA No. 1575/2015 passed by the High Court Of Punjab & Haryana At Chandigarh) THE CHAIRMAN, PUNJAB STATE POWER CORPORATION LIMITED (PREVIOUSLY PUNJAB STATE ELECTRICITY CORPORATI & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SANJEEV KUMAR & ANR. Respondent(s) (FOR ADMISSION ) Date : 14-01-2019 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDIRA BANERJEE For Petitioner(s) Ms. Zehra Khan,Adv. Mr. Karan Bharihoke, AOR Ms. Navkiran Bolay,Adv. Mr. Kaushal Narayan Mishra,Adv. Mr. Siddant Sharma,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. Issue notice. In the meantime, there shall be stay of operation of the impugned order till the next date of hearing. (MADHU BALA) (PARVEEN KUMARI PASRICHA) COURT MASTER (SH) BRANCH OFFICER
ITEM NO.19 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION IV-B 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 RAJESH KUMAR GOEL SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No(s). 40609/2018 THE CHAIRMAN, PUNJAB STATE POWER CORPORATION LIMITED (PREVIOUSLY PUNJAB STATE ELECTRICITY CORPORATI & ORS.Petitioner(s) VERSUS SANJEEV KUMAR & ANR. Respondent(s) (FOR ADMISSION and IA No.175362/2018-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN REFILING) Date : 04-01-2019 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Ms.Zehra Khan,Adv. Mr. Karan Bharihoke, AOR For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay in re-filing the petition is condoned. Registry to proceed further. RAJESH KUMAR GOEL Registrar SB
ITEM NO.71 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. KAPIL MEHTA Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 10241/2018 MOSTT. ASHA DEVI (DECEASED) THROUGH HIS LRS Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 06-08-2018 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Rajiv Kumar, Adv. Mr. D.P. Mohanty, Adv. Mr. Kusum Chaudhary, AOR For Respondent(s) Ms. Sheena Taqui, Adv. Mr. Sanjay Kapur, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Last and final opportunity is granted to respondent Nos.1 to 5 for filing counter affidavit within four weeks. Registry to process the matter for listing before the Hon'ble Court after completion of period of four weeks whether counter affidavit is filed or not as further opportunity stands declined. KAPIL MEHTA Registrar 06.08.2018 rd
ITEM NO.94 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. KAPIL MEHTA Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 10241/2018 MOSTT. ASHA DEVI (DECEASED) THROUGH HIS LRS Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 03-07-2018 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Rajiv Kumar, Adv. Mr. Kusum Chaudhary, AOR For Respondent(s) Ms. Megha Karnwal, Adv. Mr. Sanjay Kapur, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Four weeks' time is granted to respondent Nos.1 to 5 for filing counter affidavit. List again on 6.8.2018. KAPIL MEHTA Registrar 3.7.2018 rd
ITEM NO.34 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) No(s). 30335/2017 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 28-08-2017 in SA No. 363/2017 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At Allahabad, Lucknow Bench) STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SHEO SHANKAR TEWARI Respondent(s) (With Interim Relief) Date : 17-05-2018 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDU MALHOTRA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sanjay Kapur, AOR Ms. Mansi Kapur,Adv. Ms. Shubhra Kapur,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Umesh Babu Chaurasia,Adv. Mr. Satish Pandey,Adv. Mr. Rajiv Kumar,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The matter is adjourned by two weeks, as prayed. (MAHABIR SINGH) (PARVEEN KUMARI PASRICHA) COURT MASTER BRANCH OFFICER
1 ITEM NO.26 COURT NO.4 SECTION XVI S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No(s).6153/2018 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 01-11-2017 in CWJC No. 3075/2010 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Patna) MOSTT. ASHA DEVI (DECEASED) THROUGH HIS LRS Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s) (WITH I.R. and IA No.45646/2018-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING and IA No.45649/2018-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. and IA No.45647/2018- CONDONATION OF DELAY IN REFILING) Date : 09-04-2018 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN B. LOKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Rajiv Kumar, Adv. Mr. Sushil Kumar, Adv. Mr. D.P. Mohanty, Adv. Mr. Binod Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Kusum Chaudhary, AOR For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the decision of this Court in Canara Bank Vs. M. Mahesh Kumar [(2015) 7 SCC 412], particularly paragraph 17. It is further stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that ex gratia payment has not been taken by the petitioner under the Scheme of 4 th August, 2005 (Page 30).
2 Exemption from filing O.T. granted. Delay condoned. Issue notice. (SANJAY KUMAR-I) (SAROJ KUMARI GAUR) AR-CUM-PS COURT MASTER
ITEM NO.37 COURT NO.11 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) No(s). 30335/2017 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 28-08-2017 in SA No. 363/2017 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At Allahabad, Lucknow Bench) STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SHEO SHANKAR TEWARI Respondent(s) (With Interim Relief) Date : 17-11-2017 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sanjay Kapur, AOR Ms. Megha Karnwal,Adv. Ms. Harleen Bains,Adv. Ms. Shubhra Kapur,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Heard. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on State Bank of India and Others v. Raj Kumar , (2010) 11 SCC 661. It is submitted that the judgment in Canara Bank and Anr. v. M. Mahesh Kumar , (2015) 7 SCC 412, is distinguishable as the scheme considered therein is different. Issue notice returnable within four weeks. (MAHABIR SINGH) (PARVEEN KUMARI PASRICHA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER