Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- 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

Jaiveer Singh vs The State Of Uttarakhand on 3 May, 2023

Author: Aravind Kumar

Bench: Aravind Kumar

     ITEM NO.1705                           COURT NO.10                   SECTION X

                              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).    23583-
     23584/2022

     JAIVEER SINGH & ORS.                                                Petitioner(s)

                                                    VERSUS

     THE STATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ORS.                                     Respondent(s)

     (FOR ADMISSION and IA No.185982/2022-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. and
     IA No.185981/2022-PERMISSION TO FILE PETITION (SLP/TP/WP/..) and IA
     No.185979/2022-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN REFILING / CURING THE
     DEFECTS )

     WITH

     SLP(C) No. 23943/2022 (X)

     (IA No. 14615/2023 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION
     IA No. 18720/2023 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT
     IA No. 18181/2023 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT
     IA No. 29017/2023 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT
     IA No. 25931/2023 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT
     IA No. 20437/2023 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT)

     Date : 03-05-2023 These petitions were called on for hearing today.

     CORAM :
                         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR
                                           [IN CHAMBER]

     For Petitioner(s)              Mr. Abhishek Atrey, AOR
                                    Mr. Krishnam Mishra, Adv.
                                    Ms. Ambika Atrey, Adv.
                                    Dr. Abhishek Atrey, Adv.

                                    Mr. Dhananjay Garg, AOR


     For Respondent(s)              Mr. Ghanshyam Singh, Adv.
                                    Mr. Sonit Sinhmar, Adv.
                                    Mr. Rajnish Kumar Jha, AOR
Signature Not Verified
                                    Mr. Ashish Kumar Tiwari , AOR
Digitally signed by
NEETA SAPRA
Date: 2023.05.08
18:52:19 IST
Reason:                             Ms. Manisha T. Karia, AOR
                                    Ms. Nidhi Nagpal, Adv.


                                                     1
                    Mr. Mr. Adarsh Kumar, Adv.
                    Mr. Aditya Kesar, Adv.
                    Mr. Rohan Trivedi, Adv.

                   Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, AOR
                   Mr. Arun Kumar, Adv.

                   Mr. Rajnish Kumar Jha, AOR

                   Mr. Suryodaya Prakash Tiwari, Adv.
                   Ms. Shachi Pandey, Adv.
                   Mr. Keshari Kumar Tiwari, Adv.
                   Mr. Devendra Kumar Shukla, AOR
                   Mr. Bhupendra Pratap Singh, Adv.
                   Mr. Simanta Kumar, Adv.
                   Mr. Abhishek Kumar Suman, Adv.
                   Mr. Jitendra Kumar Tripathi, Adv.

                   Mr. Fuzail Ahmad Ayyubi, AOR
                   Mr. Ibad Mushtaq, Adv.
                   Ms. Akanksha Rai, Adv.

                   Mr. Sumeer Sodhi, AOR
                   Mr. Devashish Tiwari, Adv.

                   Ms. Lubna Naaz, AOR
                   Ms. Tehsheena Z. Hussain, Adv.


          UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
                             O R D E R
SLP(C) No. 23943/2022

I.A. Nos. 18720, 20437, 25931 of 2023 Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner - State submits he has no objection for these applications being allowed.

Having regard to the fact that applicants were parties to the writ petitions filed before the High Court and writ petitions came to be disposed by High Court common judgment and final order dated 14.09.2022 rendered in Writ Petition No. 350 of 2021, this Court is of the considered view that applicants would be necessary 2 and proper parties to these proceedings, inasmuch as any order passed by this Court would affect the rights of the applicants. Hence, the applications for impleadment is allowed. Applicants are ordered to be impleaded as additional respondents.

The learned counsel for the applicants to furnish the copy of the special leave petition namely, one set to each of the applicants in the respective IAs within two weeks from today and additional Memo of Parties shall be filed within the said period. The respondents who have now been impleaded by the order of given date would be at liberty to file counter affidavit, if they so desire within three weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the petition.

Two weeks’ time is granted to the respondent No. 4 to file counter affidavit, if any.

I.A. Nos. 18181 and 14615 of 2023 Though the learned counsel appearing for the applicants would contend that applicants were parties before the High Court and they are similarly placed like Mr. Binmaya Mall, the averments made in the application does not reflect this factual position. In other words, it is as vague, vagueness could be. At this juncture, the learned counsel appearing for the applicant seeks time to file additional affidavit.

Hence, permitted to file the additional affidavit. 3 I.A. No. 29017 of 2023 Learned counsel appearing for the applicants seek permission to withdraw the application.

Permission granted.

I.A. No. 29017 of 2023 is dismissed as withdrawn.

(NEETA SAPRA)                                     (MALEKAR NAGARAJ)
COURT MASTER (SH)                                   BRANCH OFFICER




                                  4