SC order
•
0 likes•27,961 views
This document outlines the proceedings of the Supreme Court of India regarding several petitions and cases. It lists the judges, lawyers, and parties involved in the hearings. It also provides orders from the court, including granting time for the Union of India to file a reply on the merits of one of the cases and setting another case for further consideration on May 10th, with the option for the respondent to file an additional affidavit.
Report
Share
Report
Share
Download to read offline
Recommended
promotion judgemnet of Revenue department staff_welfare_vs_the_state_of_kerala
The document is a high court judgment pertaining to several writ petitions challenging government orders related to seniority lists of employees in the Revenue Department of Kerala. The key details are:
1) WP(C) No. 1364/2011 challenges an order withdrawing a previous government order dated 20.10.2009 regarding seniority lists.
2) Several other writ petitions challenge the same government order dated 20.10.2009 regarding seniority lists.
3) The court deals with the contentions in WP(C) No. 1364/2011 first as it relates to withdrawing the order challenged in the other cases.
4) The petitioners argue that certain clarifications and orders regarding transfer of
WPC 28115/2006 Pokkuvaravu of harrison plantation property allowed uploaded b...
WPC 28115/2006 Pokkuvaravu of harrison plantation property allowed uploaded b...Jamesadhikaram land matter consultancy 9447464502
WPC 28115/2006 Pokkuvaravu of harrison plantation property allowed uploaded by James Joseph Adhikarathik 9447464502 From the judicial decisions of this court, enumerated in the forgoing paragraphs, it is clearly evident that despite attempting various litigations and raising varioius contentions challenging title of the 7th respondent company and the transfers made by them, the Government could not initiate any statutory proceedings under any of the relevant laws for recovery of the land or to get it established that Government holds title over the property. Legal precedents with respect to the Transfer of Registry Rules remains settled to the effect that, with respect to a transfer of title by consent of parties, mutation cannot be rejected. Further, it is evident that mutation effected will not affect the title or rights with respect to any property. Therefore, unless the Government could establish with concrete evidence based on materials that title of the property in question vests with the Government, they cannot be allowed to refuse or reject the request for mutation, based on transfer of title by consent. In both these cases the request for mutation is rejected on the basis that the Government have got a claim that the 7th respondent company and its transferees were not holding valid title. But such an allegation by itself is not sufficient to deny the mutation requested. This is especially because of the fact that the properties in question stands already mutated in the name of the 7th respondent company and its transferees, as per the revenue records. Unless and until the Government establishes through methods acceptable to law that the Government is title holder of the property and there is no absolute transfer of title by virtue of the documents relating to transaction of the properties, the denial of mutation cannot be justified and sustained. It is also not justifiable on the part of competent authorities to keep the matter indefinitely pending on the basis that an enquiry was ordered by the Government by constituting a `High Level Committee'. The Special Government Pleader is not in a position to point out that any proceedings under the Land Conservancy Act was initiated, despite liberty granted by this court.
19. Under the above mentioned circumstances, these writ petitions are allowedWPC 2424/2020 High Court Kerala Uploaded by James Adhikaram 9447464502 WPC 24...
WPC 2424/2020 High Court Kerala Uploaded by James Adhikaram 9447464502 WPC 24...Jamesadhikaram land matter consultancy 9447464502
This document is a court judgment from the High Court of Kerala regarding a petition filed by Dr. Thomas Mattathil seeking alteration of the recorded area in survey records of his land. The court examined reports submitted by survey officials and found that the excess land claimed by the petitioner is within the physical boundaries of his property and will not affect neighboring owners. The court directed the District Collector to sanction the alteration in survey records in accordance with relevant rules, and the Tahsildar to effect transfer of registry in favor of the petitioner. WPC 39769 /2018 b uploaded by James Joseph Adhikarathil പോക്കുവരവ് അപേക്ഷ- ...
WPC 39769 /2018 b uploaded by James Joseph Adhikarathil പോക്കുവരവ് അപേക്ഷ- ...Jamesadhikaram land matter consultancy 9447464502
WPC 39769 /2018 b uploaded by James Joseph Adhikarathil As already noted hereinabove, the 1st respondent Tahsildar
as the authority concerned with grant of mutation and Transfer of
Registry, has no power to examine such vexed issues of title and
therefore he has unnecessarily strayed himself into areas which are
totally irrelevant and not germane for the purpose of the enquiry for
exercising the powers conferred on him. It has been held by this
Court in a catena of decisions as in SAINUDHEEN Vs. STATE OF
KERALA [2013 (1) KHC 437 , para 13] that the Tahsildar, as the
mutation granting authority, cannot decide on the validity of the
documents, and the title of the previous owner and that Rule 16 of the
Transfer of Registry Rules has made the said position abundantly
clear. Rule 16 of the Transfer of Registry Rules mandates that “the
summary, enquiry and decision thereon is only an arrangement for
fiscal purposes, and it does not affect the title of any person in
respect of the lands covered with the decisions in Transfer of
Registry cases and the question of legal right is always subject to
adjudication by civil courts and pattas could be revised from time to
time in accordance with such judicial decisions. It has been held by
the Apex Court and various High Courts in various decisions as in
SURNEY Vs INDER KAUR [AIR 1996 SC 2823] that mutation of
W.P.(C).39769/18 - : 18 :-
property in the revenue records does not create or extinguish title,
nor has it any presumptive value on title and it only enables the
person in whose favour mutation is ordered to pay the land revenue
in question. Therefore in cases like the present one, where the
registered land holder concerned has transferred the property, then
the transferees/assignees will stand in the shoe of the land holder
and by the cumulative impact of Sec. 5(2) and Sec. 3(3) (d), the
competent revenue officials are under the bounden and statutory
obligation to accept basic land tax from them. Otherwise it will
amount to nothing but abdication to statutory obligations and duties
of such competent revenue officials, which directly leads to loss of
revenue.
3 274 20092020_01_06
The Supreme Court of India heard several matters related to citizenship in Assam. It granted the Attorney General of India 4 weeks to file a reply on one matter and granted the State of Assam 4 weeks to file replies on other matters related to interlocutory applications. The Attorney General stated that children of parents given citizenship will not be separated from parents and sent to detention centers pending the application's decision.
anti conversion law petition SC_Order_02-Jan-2023.pdf
This document is the record of proceedings from the Supreme Court of India regarding two writ petitions. It summarizes that in Writ Petition 405/2020, the counsel for the petitioners sought to withdraw the petition in order to file a fresh petition challenging the validity of legislation that replaced an Ordinance. The petition was dismissed as withdrawn. In Writ Petition 428/2020, the petition was listed to be heard on January 16, 2023.
Pegasus order
The document records the proceedings of multiple writ petitions being heard by the Supreme Court of India related to issues with the Prime Minister of India and other respondents. It notes the lawyers and parties present and orders the matters to be further heard the following day, August 17th, after reviewing an affidavit filed by the government on the issues.
20190828 s cordersitaramyechurikashmir
The Supreme Court of India heard a writ petition filed by Sitaram Yechury, General Secretary of the Communist Party of India (Marxist), seeking the production of Mohammad Yousuf Tarigami, a party member and former member of the Jammu & Kashmir Legislative Assembly. Yechury complained that he had been unable to meet or inquire about Tarigami's welfare due to being denied entry to Jammu & Kashmir. The Court permitted Yechury to travel to Jammu & Kashmir to meet Tarigami and inquire about his health and welfare, but for no other purpose. The Court directed the Senior Superintendent of Police in Jammu & Kashmir to facilitate Yechury's travel and help
Recommended
promotion judgemnet of Revenue department staff_welfare_vs_the_state_of_kerala
The document is a high court judgment pertaining to several writ petitions challenging government orders related to seniority lists of employees in the Revenue Department of Kerala. The key details are:
1) WP(C) No. 1364/2011 challenges an order withdrawing a previous government order dated 20.10.2009 regarding seniority lists.
2) Several other writ petitions challenge the same government order dated 20.10.2009 regarding seniority lists.
3) The court deals with the contentions in WP(C) No. 1364/2011 first as it relates to withdrawing the order challenged in the other cases.
4) The petitioners argue that certain clarifications and orders regarding transfer of
WPC 28115/2006 Pokkuvaravu of harrison plantation property allowed uploaded b...
WPC 28115/2006 Pokkuvaravu of harrison plantation property allowed uploaded b...Jamesadhikaram land matter consultancy 9447464502
WPC 28115/2006 Pokkuvaravu of harrison plantation property allowed uploaded by James Joseph Adhikarathik 9447464502 From the judicial decisions of this court, enumerated in the forgoing paragraphs, it is clearly evident that despite attempting various litigations and raising varioius contentions challenging title of the 7th respondent company and the transfers made by them, the Government could not initiate any statutory proceedings under any of the relevant laws for recovery of the land or to get it established that Government holds title over the property. Legal precedents with respect to the Transfer of Registry Rules remains settled to the effect that, with respect to a transfer of title by consent of parties, mutation cannot be rejected. Further, it is evident that mutation effected will not affect the title or rights with respect to any property. Therefore, unless the Government could establish with concrete evidence based on materials that title of the property in question vests with the Government, they cannot be allowed to refuse or reject the request for mutation, based on transfer of title by consent. In both these cases the request for mutation is rejected on the basis that the Government have got a claim that the 7th respondent company and its transferees were not holding valid title. But such an allegation by itself is not sufficient to deny the mutation requested. This is especially because of the fact that the properties in question stands already mutated in the name of the 7th respondent company and its transferees, as per the revenue records. Unless and until the Government establishes through methods acceptable to law that the Government is title holder of the property and there is no absolute transfer of title by virtue of the documents relating to transaction of the properties, the denial of mutation cannot be justified and sustained. It is also not justifiable on the part of competent authorities to keep the matter indefinitely pending on the basis that an enquiry was ordered by the Government by constituting a `High Level Committee'. The Special Government Pleader is not in a position to point out that any proceedings under the Land Conservancy Act was initiated, despite liberty granted by this court.
19. Under the above mentioned circumstances, these writ petitions are allowedWPC 2424/2020 High Court Kerala Uploaded by James Adhikaram 9447464502 WPC 24...
WPC 2424/2020 High Court Kerala Uploaded by James Adhikaram 9447464502 WPC 24...Jamesadhikaram land matter consultancy 9447464502
This document is a court judgment from the High Court of Kerala regarding a petition filed by Dr. Thomas Mattathil seeking alteration of the recorded area in survey records of his land. The court examined reports submitted by survey officials and found that the excess land claimed by the petitioner is within the physical boundaries of his property and will not affect neighboring owners. The court directed the District Collector to sanction the alteration in survey records in accordance with relevant rules, and the Tahsildar to effect transfer of registry in favor of the petitioner. WPC 39769 /2018 b uploaded by James Joseph Adhikarathil പോക്കുവരവ് അപേക്ഷ- ...
WPC 39769 /2018 b uploaded by James Joseph Adhikarathil പോക്കുവരവ് അപേക്ഷ- ...Jamesadhikaram land matter consultancy 9447464502
WPC 39769 /2018 b uploaded by James Joseph Adhikarathil As already noted hereinabove, the 1st respondent Tahsildar
as the authority concerned with grant of mutation and Transfer of
Registry, has no power to examine such vexed issues of title and
therefore he has unnecessarily strayed himself into areas which are
totally irrelevant and not germane for the purpose of the enquiry for
exercising the powers conferred on him. It has been held by this
Court in a catena of decisions as in SAINUDHEEN Vs. STATE OF
KERALA [2013 (1) KHC 437 , para 13] that the Tahsildar, as the
mutation granting authority, cannot decide on the validity of the
documents, and the title of the previous owner and that Rule 16 of the
Transfer of Registry Rules has made the said position abundantly
clear. Rule 16 of the Transfer of Registry Rules mandates that “the
summary, enquiry and decision thereon is only an arrangement for
fiscal purposes, and it does not affect the title of any person in
respect of the lands covered with the decisions in Transfer of
Registry cases and the question of legal right is always subject to
adjudication by civil courts and pattas could be revised from time to
time in accordance with such judicial decisions. It has been held by
the Apex Court and various High Courts in various decisions as in
SURNEY Vs INDER KAUR [AIR 1996 SC 2823] that mutation of
W.P.(C).39769/18 - : 18 :-
property in the revenue records does not create or extinguish title,
nor has it any presumptive value on title and it only enables the
person in whose favour mutation is ordered to pay the land revenue
in question. Therefore in cases like the present one, where the
registered land holder concerned has transferred the property, then
the transferees/assignees will stand in the shoe of the land holder
and by the cumulative impact of Sec. 5(2) and Sec. 3(3) (d), the
competent revenue officials are under the bounden and statutory
obligation to accept basic land tax from them. Otherwise it will
amount to nothing but abdication to statutory obligations and duties
of such competent revenue officials, which directly leads to loss of
revenue.
3 274 20092020_01_06
The Supreme Court of India heard several matters related to citizenship in Assam. It granted the Attorney General of India 4 weeks to file a reply on one matter and granted the State of Assam 4 weeks to file replies on other matters related to interlocutory applications. The Attorney General stated that children of parents given citizenship will not be separated from parents and sent to detention centers pending the application's decision.
anti conversion law petition SC_Order_02-Jan-2023.pdf
This document is the record of proceedings from the Supreme Court of India regarding two writ petitions. It summarizes that in Writ Petition 405/2020, the counsel for the petitioners sought to withdraw the petition in order to file a fresh petition challenging the validity of legislation that replaced an Ordinance. The petition was dismissed as withdrawn. In Writ Petition 428/2020, the petition was listed to be heard on January 16, 2023.
Pegasus order
The document records the proceedings of multiple writ petitions being heard by the Supreme Court of India related to issues with the Prime Minister of India and other respondents. It notes the lawyers and parties present and orders the matters to be further heard the following day, August 17th, after reviewing an affidavit filed by the government on the issues.
20190828 s cordersitaramyechurikashmir
The Supreme Court of India heard a writ petition filed by Sitaram Yechury, General Secretary of the Communist Party of India (Marxist), seeking the production of Mohammad Yousuf Tarigami, a party member and former member of the Jammu & Kashmir Legislative Assembly. Yechury complained that he had been unable to meet or inquire about Tarigami's welfare due to being denied entry to Jammu & Kashmir. The Court permitted Yechury to travel to Jammu & Kashmir to meet Tarigami and inquire about his health and welfare, but for no other purpose. The Court directed the Senior Superintendent of Police in Jammu & Kashmir to facilitate Yechury's travel and help
Sc interim order june 4 (payment of wages mha)
This document provides details of various writ petitions filed before the Supreme Court of India regarding notification dated 29.03.2020. It lists the counsel appearing for various petitioners and respondents. The court heard counsel for all parties and considered the counter affidavit filed in the main matter. The hearing is completed and the matters are listed for orders on 12.06.2020. The court also ordered that no coercive action shall be taken against employers pursuant to the impugned notification, until further orders.
Hapur Lynching
The document discusses a Supreme Court of India case involving a writ petition. At a hearing, the petitioner's counsel drew attention to statements made in an additional affidavit filed by the Superintendent of Police. The Court decided not to direct the investigating agency to file a supplementary charge-sheet, but instead permitted the petitioners to draw the trial judge's attention to statements made under Section 164 of the CrPC and deferred further hearing until after the summer vacation.
Written Arguments along with Affidavit before Patna High Court
AO NUMBER : 668271/2019 dated 16-10-2019 for Written Arguments along with Affidavit filed before Patna High Court because Judge refused to hear on 14-10-2019
Witness protection order sc in legislator cases
This document is the record of proceedings from the Supreme Court of India regarding a writ petition. It summarizes the discussion during the hearing. The amicus curiae presented a report analyzing information provided by various High Courts on pending criminal cases against elected representatives. Key issues highlighted include the need for improved video conferencing infrastructure to record witness testimony, exempting witnesses from applying for protection under the witness protection scheme, appointing nodal prosecution officers to ensure cases progress swiftly, having judicial officers handle such cases for at least 2 years for continuity, and addressing specific issues faced by High Courts of Kerala and Calcutta where police are reluctant to take action against legislators. The Court will consider the suggestions to rationalize the process for expeditious disposal
Jai bhagwan daily order
The Supreme Court of India heard a writ petition filed by Jai Bhagwan regarding the State of Haryana. The court directed the standing counsel for Haryana to file a counter affidavit or status report by November 8th. Senior police officers must appear with relevant records on that date. Liberty was also granted to the petitioners' counsel to file a status report. The matter was listed for further hearing on November 8th.
Order_29-Nov-2023.pdf rarGFTGSZXTRRFREEDEE
2023 (और उससे पहले 2022) में सुप्रीम कोर्ट द्वारा नफरत फैलाने वाले भाषण पर अंकुश लगाने के लिए जारी किए गए कई दिशानिर्देशों के बावजूद हेट स्पीच की घटनाएं सामने आती रहती हैं। नागरिक नफरत मुक्त 2024 कैसे सुनिश्चित कर सकते हैं?
Order_28-Nov-2022.pdf
This document contains the record of proceedings from the Supreme Court of India regarding a petition for special leave to appeal. It lists the advocates appearing for the petitioner and respondent and notes from the High Courts of Rajasthan, Delhi, Meghalaya, and Tripura. The court heard submissions from counsel and ordered that written submissions from the petitioner be taken on record. The matter was listed for hearing after three weeks and states yet to file affidavits on status were ordered to do so in the meantime.
Sc order april 6 (2)
The Supreme Court of India heard several matters related to implementation of its previous orders on police reforms. It directed the Union of India to make necessary budgetary allocations for six agencies within one month to implement the orders. These agencies must then implement the orders in full within six months of receiving funds. The Court also reviewed progress in some states but noted no progress in Andaman & Nicobar Islands, directing its Principal Secretary to allocate funds within a month or implement the orders in full within six months of funding. It thanked the Amicus Curiae for assistance and scheduled review on a future date.
Sc order jan 25 2021
1) The Supreme Court of India heard a special leave petition filed by Jasmin Begum challenging a judgment of the Gauhati High Court.
2) Jasmin Begum's lawyer sought permission to withdraw the petition to file a review petition with the High Court instead.
3) The Supreme Court granted the permission to withdraw the petition and dismissed it, but noted that Jasmin Begum could approach the Supreme Court again if she is unsuccessful in her review petition before the High Court.
Interlocutory Application 01 of 2019 before Patna High Court
Against violation of High Court Rules by the Registry & Organised mob lynching and illegal detention of petitioner by the nexus of State and Mafia.
order25-aug-2022-432199.pdf
This document is a record of proceedings from the Supreme Court of India regarding a writ petition. It notes that the petition was heard by the Chief Justice and two other justices. It allowed the petitioners' application for exemption from filing an official translation and issued a notice returnable within two weeks with permission for dasti service. It also directed the petitioners to implead persons released by the state of Gujarat on August 15, 2022 pursuant to a prior state order.
20191018 sc order on hajela transfer
This document is the record of proceedings from the Supreme Court of India regarding several writ petitions and interim applications. It summarizes that the Court, after hearing from lawyers representing various parties, ordered the inter-cadre transfer of Mr. Prateek Hajela, the State Coordinator for the National Register of Citizens (NRC) in Assam, to the state of Madhya Pradesh on deputation for the maximum period allowed under relevant rules. The notification for this transfer must be issued within 7 days. All other issues in the case will be heard again by the Court on November 26, 2019.
Court Order
This document summarizes a court case between Sunil Goel and others (petitioners) versus Guild Builders Private Limited and others (respondents). The petitioners filed an affidavit of service and are pressing for interim directions to prevent the respondent company from pledging or encumbering shares and to allow the petitioners access to company records. The court ordered the respondents to file a reply and allowed the petitioners inspection of company records as per the Companies Act. The matter was listed for further hearing on December 21, 2018.
Integrating Advocacy and Legal Tactics to Tackle Online Consumer Complaints
Our company bridges the gap between registered users and experienced advocates, offering a user-friendly online platform for seamless interaction. This platform empowers users to voice their grievances, particularly regarding online consumer issues. We streamline support by utilizing our team of expert advocates to provide consultancy services and initiate appropriate legal actions.
Our Online Consumer Legal Forum offers comprehensive guidance to individuals and businesses facing consumer complaints. With a dedicated team, round-the-clock support, and efficient complaint management, we are the preferred solution for addressing consumer grievances.
Our intuitive online interface allows individuals to register complaints, seek legal advice, and pursue justice conveniently. Users can submit complaints via mobile devices and send legal notices to companies directly through our portal.
原版定做(sheffield学位证书)英国谢菲尔德大学毕业证文凭证书原版一模一样
原版定制【微信:bwp0011】《(sheffield学位证书)英国谢菲尔德大学毕业证文凭证书》【微信:bwp0011】成绩单 、雅思、外壳、留信学历认证永久存档查询，采用学校原版纸张、特殊工艺完全按照原版一比一制作（包括：隐形水印，阴影底纹，钢印LOGO烫金烫银，LOGO烫金烫银复合重叠，文字图案浮雕，激光镭射，紫外荧光，温感，复印防伪）行业标杆！精益求精，诚心合作，真诚制作！多年品质 ,按需精细制作，24小时接单,全套进口原装设备，十五年致力于帮助留学生解决难题，业务范围有加拿大、英国、澳洲、韩国、美国、新加坡，新西兰等学历材料，包您满意。
【业务选择办理准则】
一、工作未确定，回国需先给父母、亲戚朋友看下文凭的情况，办理一份就读学校的毕业证【微信bwp0011】文凭即可
二、回国进私企、外企、自己做生意的情况，这些单位是不查询毕业证真伪的，而且国内没有渠道去查询国外文凭的真假，也不需要提供真实教育部认证。鉴于此，办理一份毕业证【微信bwp0011】即可
三、进国企，银行，事业单位，考公务员等等，这些单位是必需要提供真实教育部认证的，办理教育部认证所需资料众多且烦琐，所有材料您都必须提供原件，我们凭借丰富的经验，快捷的绿色通道帮您快速整合材料，让您少走弯路。
留信网认证的作用:
1:该专业认证可证明留学生真实身份
2:同时对留学生所学专业登记给予评定
3:国家专业人才认证中心颁发入库证书
4:这个认证书并且可以归档倒地方
5:凡事获得留信网入网的信息将会逐步更新到个人身份内，将在公安局网内查询个人身份证信息后，同步读取人才网入库信息
6:个人职称评审加20分
7:个人信誉贷款加10分
8:在国家人才网主办的国家网络招聘大会中纳入资料，供国家高端企业选择人才
【关于价格问题（保证一手价格）】
我们所定的价格是非常合理的，而且我们现在做得单子大多数都是代理和回头客户介绍的所以一般现在有新的单子 我给客户的都是第一手的代理价格，因为我想坦诚对待大家 不想跟大家在价格方面浪费时间
对于老客户或者被老客户介绍过来的朋友，我们都会适当给一些优惠。
Receivership and liquidation Accounts Prof. Oyedokun.pptx
Receivership and liquidation Accounts Prof. Oyedokun.pptxGodwin Emmanuel Oyedokun MBA MSc PhD FCA FCTI FCNA CFE FFAR
Receivership and liquidation Accounts
Being a Paper Presented at Business Recovery and Insolvency Practitioners Association of Nigeria (BRIPAN) on Friday, August 18, 2023.
Genocide in International Criminal Law.pptx
Excited to share insights from my recent presentation on genocide! 💡 In light of ongoing debates, it's crucial to delve into the nuances of this grave crime.
Corporate Governance : Scope and Legal Framework
CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
MEANING
Corporate Governance refers to the way in which companies are governed and to what purpose. It identifies who has power and accountability, and who makes decisions. It is, in essence, a toolkit that enables management and the board to deal more effectively with the challenges of running a company.
Business Laws Sunita saha
Business law for the students of undergraduate level. The presentation contains the summary of all the chapters under the syllabus of State University, Contract Act, Sale of Goods Act, Negotiable Instrument Act, Partnership Act, Limited Liability Act, Consumer Protection Act.
Sangyun Lee, 'Why Korea's Merger Control Occasionally Fails: A Public Choice ...
Presentation slides for a session held on June 4, 2024, at Kyoto University. This presentation is based on the presenter’s recent paper, coauthored with Hwang Lee, Professor, Korea University, with the same title, published in the Journal of Business Administration & Law, Volume 34, No. 2 (April 2024). The paper, written in Korean, is available at <https://shorturl.at/GCWcI>.
V.-SENTHIL-BALAJI-SLP-C-8939-8940-2023-SC-Judgment-07-August-2023.pdf
सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने यह भी माना था कि मजिस्ट्रेट का यह कर्तव्य है कि वह सुनिश्चित करे कि अधिकारी पीएमएलए के तहत निर्धारित प्रक्रिया के साथ-साथ संवैधानिक सुरक्षा उपायों का भी उचित रूप से पालन करें।
It's the Law: Recent Court and Administrative Decisions of Interest
2024 Idaho Water Users Association, Sun Valley, Idaho - June 11, 2024. Presented by Payton Hampton and Garrett Kitamura
More Related Content
Similar to SC order
Sc interim order june 4 (payment of wages mha)
This document provides details of various writ petitions filed before the Supreme Court of India regarding notification dated 29.03.2020. It lists the counsel appearing for various petitioners and respondents. The court heard counsel for all parties and considered the counter affidavit filed in the main matter. The hearing is completed and the matters are listed for orders on 12.06.2020. The court also ordered that no coercive action shall be taken against employers pursuant to the impugned notification, until further orders.
Hapur Lynching
The document discusses a Supreme Court of India case involving a writ petition. At a hearing, the petitioner's counsel drew attention to statements made in an additional affidavit filed by the Superintendent of Police. The Court decided not to direct the investigating agency to file a supplementary charge-sheet, but instead permitted the petitioners to draw the trial judge's attention to statements made under Section 164 of the CrPC and deferred further hearing until after the summer vacation.
Written Arguments along with Affidavit before Patna High Court
AO NUMBER : 668271/2019 dated 16-10-2019 for Written Arguments along with Affidavit filed before Patna High Court because Judge refused to hear on 14-10-2019
Witness protection order sc in legislator cases
This document is the record of proceedings from the Supreme Court of India regarding a writ petition. It summarizes the discussion during the hearing. The amicus curiae presented a report analyzing information provided by various High Courts on pending criminal cases against elected representatives. Key issues highlighted include the need for improved video conferencing infrastructure to record witness testimony, exempting witnesses from applying for protection under the witness protection scheme, appointing nodal prosecution officers to ensure cases progress swiftly, having judicial officers handle such cases for at least 2 years for continuity, and addressing specific issues faced by High Courts of Kerala and Calcutta where police are reluctant to take action against legislators. The Court will consider the suggestions to rationalize the process for expeditious disposal
Jai bhagwan daily order
The Supreme Court of India heard a writ petition filed by Jai Bhagwan regarding the State of Haryana. The court directed the standing counsel for Haryana to file a counter affidavit or status report by November 8th. Senior police officers must appear with relevant records on that date. Liberty was also granted to the petitioners' counsel to file a status report. The matter was listed for further hearing on November 8th.
Order_29-Nov-2023.pdf rarGFTGSZXTRRFREEDEE
2023 (और उससे पहले 2022) में सुप्रीम कोर्ट द्वारा नफरत फैलाने वाले भाषण पर अंकुश लगाने के लिए जारी किए गए कई दिशानिर्देशों के बावजूद हेट स्पीच की घटनाएं सामने आती रहती हैं। नागरिक नफरत मुक्त 2024 कैसे सुनिश्चित कर सकते हैं?
Order_28-Nov-2022.pdf
This document contains the record of proceedings from the Supreme Court of India regarding a petition for special leave to appeal. It lists the advocates appearing for the petitioner and respondent and notes from the High Courts of Rajasthan, Delhi, Meghalaya, and Tripura. The court heard submissions from counsel and ordered that written submissions from the petitioner be taken on record. The matter was listed for hearing after three weeks and states yet to file affidavits on status were ordered to do so in the meantime.
Sc order april 6 (2)
The Supreme Court of India heard several matters related to implementation of its previous orders on police reforms. It directed the Union of India to make necessary budgetary allocations for six agencies within one month to implement the orders. These agencies must then implement the orders in full within six months of receiving funds. The Court also reviewed progress in some states but noted no progress in Andaman & Nicobar Islands, directing its Principal Secretary to allocate funds within a month or implement the orders in full within six months of funding. It thanked the Amicus Curiae for assistance and scheduled review on a future date.
Sc order jan 25 2021
1) The Supreme Court of India heard a special leave petition filed by Jasmin Begum challenging a judgment of the Gauhati High Court.
2) Jasmin Begum's lawyer sought permission to withdraw the petition to file a review petition with the High Court instead.
3) The Supreme Court granted the permission to withdraw the petition and dismissed it, but noted that Jasmin Begum could approach the Supreme Court again if she is unsuccessful in her review petition before the High Court.
Interlocutory Application 01 of 2019 before Patna High Court
Against violation of High Court Rules by the Registry & Organised mob lynching and illegal detention of petitioner by the nexus of State and Mafia.
order25-aug-2022-432199.pdf
This document is a record of proceedings from the Supreme Court of India regarding a writ petition. It notes that the petition was heard by the Chief Justice and two other justices. It allowed the petitioners' application for exemption from filing an official translation and issued a notice returnable within two weeks with permission for dasti service. It also directed the petitioners to implead persons released by the state of Gujarat on August 15, 2022 pursuant to a prior state order.
20191018 sc order on hajela transfer
This document is the record of proceedings from the Supreme Court of India regarding several writ petitions and interim applications. It summarizes that the Court, after hearing from lawyers representing various parties, ordered the inter-cadre transfer of Mr. Prateek Hajela, the State Coordinator for the National Register of Citizens (NRC) in Assam, to the state of Madhya Pradesh on deputation for the maximum period allowed under relevant rules. The notification for this transfer must be issued within 7 days. All other issues in the case will be heard again by the Court on November 26, 2019.
Court Order
This document summarizes a court case between Sunil Goel and others (petitioners) versus Guild Builders Private Limited and others (respondents). The petitioners filed an affidavit of service and are pressing for interim directions to prevent the respondent company from pledging or encumbering shares and to allow the petitioners access to company records. The court ordered the respondents to file a reply and allowed the petitioners inspection of company records as per the Companies Act. The matter was listed for further hearing on December 21, 2018.
Similar to SC order (13)
Written Arguments along with Affidavit before Patna High Court
Written Arguments along with Affidavit before Patna High Court
Interlocutory Application 01 of 2019 before Patna High Court
Interlocutory Application 01 of 2019 before Patna High Court
Recently uploaded
Integrating Advocacy and Legal Tactics to Tackle Online Consumer Complaints
Our company bridges the gap between registered users and experienced advocates, offering a user-friendly online platform for seamless interaction. This platform empowers users to voice their grievances, particularly regarding online consumer issues. We streamline support by utilizing our team of expert advocates to provide consultancy services and initiate appropriate legal actions.
Our Online Consumer Legal Forum offers comprehensive guidance to individuals and businesses facing consumer complaints. With a dedicated team, round-the-clock support, and efficient complaint management, we are the preferred solution for addressing consumer grievances.
Our intuitive online interface allows individuals to register complaints, seek legal advice, and pursue justice conveniently. Users can submit complaints via mobile devices and send legal notices to companies directly through our portal.
原版定做(sheffield学位证书)英国谢菲尔德大学毕业证文凭证书原版一模一样
原版定制【微信:bwp0011】《(sheffield学位证书)英国谢菲尔德大学毕业证文凭证书》【微信:bwp0011】成绩单 、雅思、外壳、留信学历认证永久存档查询，采用学校原版纸张、特殊工艺完全按照原版一比一制作（包括：隐形水印，阴影底纹，钢印LOGO烫金烫银，LOGO烫金烫银复合重叠，文字图案浮雕，激光镭射，紫外荧光，温感，复印防伪）行业标杆！精益求精，诚心合作，真诚制作！多年品质 ,按需精细制作，24小时接单,全套进口原装设备，十五年致力于帮助留学生解决难题，业务范围有加拿大、英国、澳洲、韩国、美国、新加坡，新西兰等学历材料，包您满意。
【业务选择办理准则】
一、工作未确定，回国需先给父母、亲戚朋友看下文凭的情况，办理一份就读学校的毕业证【微信bwp0011】文凭即可
二、回国进私企、外企、自己做生意的情况，这些单位是不查询毕业证真伪的，而且国内没有渠道去查询国外文凭的真假，也不需要提供真实教育部认证。鉴于此，办理一份毕业证【微信bwp0011】即可
三、进国企，银行，事业单位，考公务员等等，这些单位是必需要提供真实教育部认证的，办理教育部认证所需资料众多且烦琐，所有材料您都必须提供原件，我们凭借丰富的经验，快捷的绿色通道帮您快速整合材料，让您少走弯路。
留信网认证的作用:
1:该专业认证可证明留学生真实身份
2:同时对留学生所学专业登记给予评定
3:国家专业人才认证中心颁发入库证书
4:这个认证书并且可以归档倒地方
5:凡事获得留信网入网的信息将会逐步更新到个人身份内，将在公安局网内查询个人身份证信息后，同步读取人才网入库信息
6:个人职称评审加20分
7:个人信誉贷款加10分
8:在国家人才网主办的国家网络招聘大会中纳入资料，供国家高端企业选择人才
【关于价格问题（保证一手价格）】
我们所定的价格是非常合理的，而且我们现在做得单子大多数都是代理和回头客户介绍的所以一般现在有新的单子 我给客户的都是第一手的代理价格，因为我想坦诚对待大家 不想跟大家在价格方面浪费时间
对于老客户或者被老客户介绍过来的朋友，我们都会适当给一些优惠。
Receivership and liquidation Accounts Prof. Oyedokun.pptx
Receivership and liquidation Accounts Prof. Oyedokun.pptxGodwin Emmanuel Oyedokun MBA MSc PhD FCA FCTI FCNA CFE FFAR
Receivership and liquidation Accounts
Being a Paper Presented at Business Recovery and Insolvency Practitioners Association of Nigeria (BRIPAN) on Friday, August 18, 2023.
Genocide in International Criminal Law.pptx
Excited to share insights from my recent presentation on genocide! 💡 In light of ongoing debates, it's crucial to delve into the nuances of this grave crime.
Corporate Governance : Scope and Legal Framework
CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
MEANING
Corporate Governance refers to the way in which companies are governed and to what purpose. It identifies who has power and accountability, and who makes decisions. It is, in essence, a toolkit that enables management and the board to deal more effectively with the challenges of running a company.
Business Laws Sunita saha
Business law for the students of undergraduate level. The presentation contains the summary of all the chapters under the syllabus of State University, Contract Act, Sale of Goods Act, Negotiable Instrument Act, Partnership Act, Limited Liability Act, Consumer Protection Act.
Sangyun Lee, 'Why Korea's Merger Control Occasionally Fails: A Public Choice ...
Presentation slides for a session held on June 4, 2024, at Kyoto University. This presentation is based on the presenter’s recent paper, coauthored with Hwang Lee, Professor, Korea University, with the same title, published in the Journal of Business Administration & Law, Volume 34, No. 2 (April 2024). The paper, written in Korean, is available at <https://shorturl.at/GCWcI>.
V.-SENTHIL-BALAJI-SLP-C-8939-8940-2023-SC-Judgment-07-August-2023.pdf
सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने यह भी माना था कि मजिस्ट्रेट का यह कर्तव्य है कि वह सुनिश्चित करे कि अधिकारी पीएमएलए के तहत निर्धारित प्रक्रिया के साथ-साथ संवैधानिक सुरक्षा उपायों का भी उचित रूप से पालन करें।
It's the Law: Recent Court and Administrative Decisions of Interest
2024 Idaho Water Users Association, Sun Valley, Idaho - June 11, 2024. Presented by Payton Hampton and Garrett Kitamura
快速办理(SCU毕业证书)澳洲南十字星大学毕业证文凭证书一模一样
学校原件一模一样【微信：741003700 】《(SCU毕业证书)澳洲南十字星大学毕业证文凭证书》【微信：741003700 】学位证，留信认证（真实可查，永久存档）原件一模一样纸张工艺/offer、雅思、外壳等材料/诚信可靠,可直接看成品样本，帮您解决无法毕业带来的各种难题！外壳，原版制作，诚信可靠，可直接看成品样本。行业标杆！精益求精，诚心合作，真诚制作！多年品质 ,按需精细制作，24小时接单,全套进口原装设备。十五年致力于帮助留学生解决难题，包您满意。
本公司拥有海外各大学样板无数，能完美还原。
1:1完美还原海外各大学毕业材料上的工艺：水印，阴影底纹，钢印LOGO烫金烫银，LOGO烫金烫银复合重叠。文字图案浮雕、激光镭射、紫外荧光、温感、复印防伪等防伪工艺。材料咨询办理、认证咨询办理请加学历顾问Q/微741003700
【主营项目】
一.毕业证【q微741003700】成绩单、使馆认证、教育部认证、雅思托福成绩单、学生卡等！
二.真实使馆公证(即留学回国人员证明,不成功不收费)
三.真实教育部学历学位认证（教育部存档！教育部留服网站永久可查）
四.办理各国各大学文凭(一对一专业服务,可全程监控跟踪进度)
如果您处于以下几种情况：
◇在校期间，因各种原因未能顺利毕业……拿不到官方毕业证【q/微741003700】
◇面对父母的压力，希望尽快拿到；
◇不清楚认证流程以及材料该如何准备；
◇回国时间很长，忘记办理；
◇回国马上就要找工作，办给用人单位看；
◇企事业单位必须要求办理的
◇需要报考公务员、购买免税车、落转户口
◇申请留学生创业基金
留信网认证的作用:
1:该专业认证可证明留学生真实身份
2:同时对留学生所学专业登记给予评定
3:国家专业人才认证中心颁发入库证书
4:这个认证书并且可以归档倒地方
5:凡事获得留信网入网的信息将会逐步更新到个人身份内，将在公安局网内查询个人身份证信息后，同步读取人才网入库信息
6:个人职称评审加20分
7:个人信誉贷款加10分
8:在国家人才网主办的国家网络招聘大会中纳入资料，供国家高端企业选择人才
The Work Permit for Self-Employed Persons in Italy
Learn more on how to obtain the work permit for self-employed persons in Italy at https://immigration-italy.com/selfemployment-work-permit-in-italy/.
在线办理(SU毕业证书)美国雪城大学毕业证成绩单一模一样
学校原件一模一样【微信：741003700 】《(SU毕业证书)美国雪城大学毕业证成绩单》【微信：741003700 】学位证，留信认证（真实可查，永久存档）原件一模一样纸张工艺/offer、雅思、外壳等材料/诚信可靠,可直接看成品样本，帮您解决无法毕业带来的各种难题！外壳，原版制作，诚信可靠，可直接看成品样本。行业标杆！精益求精，诚心合作，真诚制作！多年品质 ,按需精细制作，24小时接单,全套进口原装设备。十五年致力于帮助留学生解决难题，包您满意。
本公司拥有海外各大学样板无数，能完美还原。
1:1完美还原海外各大学毕业材料上的工艺：水印，阴影底纹，钢印LOGO烫金烫银，LOGO烫金烫银复合重叠。文字图案浮雕、激光镭射、紫外荧光、温感、复印防伪等防伪工艺。材料咨询办理、认证咨询办理请加学历顾问Q/微741003700
【主营项目】
一.毕业证【q微741003700】成绩单、使馆认证、教育部认证、雅思托福成绩单、学生卡等！
二.真实使馆公证(即留学回国人员证明,不成功不收费)
三.真实教育部学历学位认证（教育部存档！教育部留服网站永久可查）
四.办理各国各大学文凭(一对一专业服务,可全程监控跟踪进度)
如果您处于以下几种情况：
◇在校期间，因各种原因未能顺利毕业……拿不到官方毕业证【q/微741003700】
◇面对父母的压力，希望尽快拿到；
◇不清楚认证流程以及材料该如何准备；
◇回国时间很长，忘记办理；
◇回国马上就要找工作，办给用人单位看；
◇企事业单位必须要求办理的
◇需要报考公务员、购买免税车、落转户口
◇申请留学生创业基金
留信网认证的作用:
1:该专业认证可证明留学生真实身份
2:同时对留学生所学专业登记给予评定
3:国家专业人才认证中心颁发入库证书
4:这个认证书并且可以归档倒地方
5:凡事获得留信网入网的信息将会逐步更新到个人身份内，将在公安局网内查询个人身份证信息后，同步读取人才网入库信息
6:个人职称评审加20分
7:个人信誉贷款加10分
8:在国家人才网主办的国家网络招聘大会中纳入资料，供国家高端企业选择人才
Pedal to the Court Understanding Your Rights after a Cycling Collision.pdf
The immediate step is an intelligent choice; don’t procrastinate. In the aftermath of the crash, taking care of yourself and taking quick steps can help you protect yourself from significant injuries. Make sure that you have collected the essential data and information.
From Promise to Practice. Implementing AI in Legal Environments
Pim Betist's presentation about generative AI in the legal sector at Lexpo.com '24
原版制作(PSU毕业证书)宾州州立大学公园分校毕业证学历证书一模一样
学校原件一模一样【微信：741003700 】《(PSU毕业证书)宾州州立大学公园分校毕业证学历证书》【微信：741003700 】学位证，留信认证（真实可查，永久存档）原件一模一样纸张工艺/offer、雅思、外壳等材料/诚信可靠,可直接看成品样本，帮您解决无法毕业带来的各种难题！外壳，原版制作，诚信可靠，可直接看成品样本。行业标杆！精益求精，诚心合作，真诚制作！多年品质 ,按需精细制作，24小时接单,全套进口原装设备。十五年致力于帮助留学生解决难题，包您满意。
本公司拥有海外各大学样板无数，能完美还原。
1:1完美还原海外各大学毕业材料上的工艺：水印，阴影底纹，钢印LOGO烫金烫银，LOGO烫金烫银复合重叠。文字图案浮雕、激光镭射、紫外荧光、温感、复印防伪等防伪工艺。材料咨询办理、认证咨询办理请加学历顾问Q/微741003700
【主营项目】
一.毕业证【q微741003700】成绩单、使馆认证、教育部认证、雅思托福成绩单、学生卡等！
二.真实使馆公证(即留学回国人员证明,不成功不收费)
三.真实教育部学历学位认证（教育部存档！教育部留服网站永久可查）
四.办理各国各大学文凭(一对一专业服务,可全程监控跟踪进度)
如果您处于以下几种情况：
◇在校期间，因各种原因未能顺利毕业……拿不到官方毕业证【q/微741003700】
◇面对父母的压力，希望尽快拿到；
◇不清楚认证流程以及材料该如何准备；
◇回国时间很长，忘记办理；
◇回国马上就要找工作，办给用人单位看；
◇企事业单位必须要求办理的
◇需要报考公务员、购买免税车、落转户口
◇申请留学生创业基金
留信网认证的作用:
1:该专业认证可证明留学生真实身份
2:同时对留学生所学专业登记给予评定
3:国家专业人才认证中心颁发入库证书
4:这个认证书并且可以归档倒地方
5:凡事获得留信网入网的信息将会逐步更新到个人身份内，将在公安局网内查询个人身份证信息后，同步读取人才网入库信息
6:个人职称评审加20分
7:个人信誉贷款加10分
8:在国家人才网主办的国家网络招聘大会中纳入资料，供国家高端企业选择人才
San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflict at Sea
Presentation by Justin Ordoyo
University of the Philippines College of Law
Presentation (1).pptx Human rights of LGBTQ people in India, constitutional a...
Human rights of LGBTQ people in India, constitutional and judicial approach
Recently uploaded (20)
Integrating Advocacy and Legal Tactics to Tackle Online Consumer Complaints
Integrating Advocacy and Legal Tactics to Tackle Online Consumer Complaints
Receivership and liquidation Accounts Prof. Oyedokun.pptx
Receivership and liquidation Accounts Prof. Oyedokun.pptx
Sangyun Lee, 'Why Korea's Merger Control Occasionally Fails: A Public Choice ...
Sangyun Lee, 'Why Korea's Merger Control Occasionally Fails: A Public Choice ...
V.-SENTHIL-BALAJI-SLP-C-8939-8940-2023-SC-Judgment-07-August-2023.pdf
V.-SENTHIL-BALAJI-SLP-C-8939-8940-2023-SC-Judgment-07-August-2023.pdf
It's the Law: Recent Court and Administrative Decisions of Interest
It's the Law: Recent Court and Administrative Decisions of Interest
The Work Permit for Self-Employed Persons in Italy
The Work Permit for Self-Employed Persons in Italy
Pedal to the Court Understanding Your Rights after a Cycling Collision.pdf
Pedal to the Court Understanding Your Rights after a Cycling Collision.pdf
From Promise to Practice. Implementing AI in Legal Environments
From Promise to Practice. Implementing AI in Legal Environments
San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflict at Sea
San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflict at Sea
Presentation (1).pptx Human rights of LGBTQ people in India, constitutional a...
Presentation (1).pptx Human rights of LGBTQ people in India, constitutional a...
SC order
- 1. 1 ITEM NO.301 COURT NO.1 SECTION PIL-W S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS R.P.(Crl.) No. 46/2019 in W.P.(Crl.) No. 298/2018 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 14-12-2018 in W.P.(Crl.) No. 298/2018 passed by the Supreme Court Of India) YASHWANT SINHA & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR & ANR. Respondent(s) WITH MA No. 58/2019 in W.P.(Crl.) No. 225/2018 (PIL-W) (IA No. 182576/2018-CORRECTION OF MISTAKES IN THE JUDGMENT) R.P.(Crl.) No. 122/2019 in W.P.(Crl.) No. 297/2018 (PIL-W) MA No. 403/2019 in W.P.(Crl.) No. 298/2018 (PIL-W) (IA No. 29248/2019-INITIATING CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS U/S 340 OF CRPC) R.P.(C) No. 719/2019 in W.P.(C) No. 1205/2018 (PIL-W) CONMT.PET.(Crl.) No. 3/2019 in R.P.(Crl.) No. 46/2019 in W.P.(Crl.) No. 298/2018 (PIL-W) Date : 30-04-2019 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.M. JOSEPH Counsel for the parties: Mr. Prashant Bhushan, Petitioner-in-Person Mr. Arun Shourie, Petitioner-in-Person Mr. Yashwant Sinha, Petitioner-in-Person Mr. Manohar Lal Sharma, Petitioner-in-person Ms. Suman, Adv. Mr. Dheeraj Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Mrinal Kumar, Adv. Mr. Alok Shukla, AOR Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. Digitally signed by DEEPAK SINGH Date: 2019.04.30 18:20:28 IST Reason: Signature Not Verified
- 2. 2 Ms. Deepika K., Adv. Mr. Kapish Seth, Adv. Ms. Srishti Banerjee, Adv. Dr. Ashutosh Garg, AOR C.P. No. 3/2019 Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, Sr. Adv. Ms. Ruchi Kohli, AOR Mr. K.K. Venugopal, A.G. Mr. Tushar Mehta, S.G. Mr. R. Balasubramanian, Sr. Adv. Ms. Shraddha Deshmukh, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR C.P. No. 3/2019 Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Prashanto Chandra Sen, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sunil Fernandes, AOR Mr. Avishkar Singhvi, Adv. Mr. Varun Chopra, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Bhalla, Adv. Mr. Priyansha Indra Sharma, Adv. Mr. Udayan Verma, Adv. Mr. Kaustubh Sinha, Adv. For Intervenor Mr. Debasis Misra, Adv. Mr. Binay Kumar Jha, Adv. Ms. Alpana Sharma, Adv. Mr. Rajnish Kumar, Adv. Mr. Sreyas Gachhe, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R R.P. (Crl.) No. 46/2019 in W.P. (Crl.) No. 298/2018, MA No. 58/2019 in W.P.(Crl.) No. 225/2018, R.P.(Crl.) No. 122/2019 in W.P.(Crl.) No. 297/2018, MA No. 403/2019 in W.P.(Crl.) No. 298/2018 and R.P.(C) No. 719/2019 in W.P.(C) No. 1205/2018: A letter has been circulated on behalf of the Union of India and a prayer has been made by the learned Attorney General for India that time be granted to the Union of India to file reply on merits. We fix the matter for further consideration on 06.05.2019. Reply affidavit, if any, by the contesting parties may be brought
- 3. 3 on record on or before 04.05.2019. Response of the Union of India on behalf of the Interim Application Nos. 71047/2019, 69006/2019, 69008/2019 and 69009/2019 also be filed by 04.05.2019. CONMT.PET.(Crl.) No. 3/2019 in R.P.(Crl.) No. 46/2019 in W.P.(Crl.) No. 298/2018: We have heard learned counsel for the parties. After an extensive hearing Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, learned senior counsel for the respondent, seeks liberty to file an additional affidavit. While we observe that it will be open for the respondent to file the additional affidavit if he so desires, we make it clear that the admissibility and acceptance of any affidavit, if filed, will be considered on the next date fixed i.e. 10.05.2019. (SUSHIL KUMAR RAKHEJA) (ANAND PRAKASH) AR CUM PS BRANCH OFFICER