Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Integrated with over 4 crore judgments and laws — designed for legal practitioners, researchers, students and institutions

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

Dr. Balbir Singh Bhandari vs The State Of Uttarakhand on 4 April, 2019

     ITEM NO.80                          REGISTRAR COURT. 1                 SECTION X

                                   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).   33036/2018

     DR. BALBIR SINGH BHANDARI                                           Petitioner(s)

                                                    VERSUS

     THE STATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ORS.                                     Respondent(s)


     WITH
     SLP(C) No. 33039/2018 (X)

         SLP(C) No. 33041/2018 (X)

         SLP(C) No. 33042/2018 (X)

         SLP(C) No. 33037/2018 (X)

         SLP(C) No. 33040/2018 (X)


     Date : 04-04-2019 This petition was called on for hearing today.



     For Petitioner(s)
                                       Mr. Siddharth Bhatia, Adv.
                                       Mr. Manan Verma, AOR

     For Respondent(s)
                                       Mr. Ashutosh Kumar Sharma, Adv.
                                       Ms. Rachana Srivastava, AOR


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

There are common respondents in all the matters. Four weeks' time is granted to respondent Nos.1 to 3 for Signature Not Verified filing counter affidavit.

Digitally signed by

VINOD KUMAR TIWARI Date: 2019.04.08 17:49:36 IST Reason:

Ld. Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3 submits that copy of pleadings has not been served upon him. There is no Item No.80 -2- proof filed that the process was served without copies. Ld. Counsel submits that the copy of pleadings might have been sent to the office of respondent - Government of Uttarakhand but they have not assigned it to him. This plea cannot be permitted to be mode a tool to seek adjournment and delay the matter. There are ways and means, like scanning the document and sending it by e-mail. Ld. Counsels representing States cannot be allowed to seek another copy as a matter of right as it puts additional burden on the poor litigants and they will have to incur additional expenses. More so when Ld. Counsel for the State Government can conveniently call for its scan on copy from his client State. However, Ld. Counsel for the petitioner would be at liberty to share scanned copy in case his client has no problem in arranging that. Service is complete on respondent No.5 but none has entered appearance.

Ld. Counsel for the petitioner to take fresh steps for service of respondent Nos.4, 6 and 7 alongwith fresh and complete address of respondent No.6 within two weeks. List again on 15.7.2019.

SURINDER S. RATHI Registrar