Tuesday, July 21, 2015

Orders dated 15.07.2015

Dear member, 

Orders passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India on 15.07.2015 is as under :-

I.A. NO.44 OF 2013 AND I.A. NO. 1 OF 2015
WRIT PETITION (C ) NO. 113 OF 1996 

OKHLA ENCLAVE JOINT ACTION COMMITTEE ...PETITIONER VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ...RESPONDENTS I.A. NO. 9 IN W.P. (C ) NO. 792 OF 1996 I.A. NOS. 8-9, CRL. M.P. NO./2010 IN I.A. NO. 8, I.A. NOS. 10, 13-24, I.A. NOS.1-170 AND I.A. NO. 1 IN I.A. NO.58 IN I.A. NOS. 8 AND 9 IN W.P. (C ) NO. 876 OF 1996. W.P. (C ) NO. 1037 OF 2014 I.A. NO.1/2015 IN W.P. (C ) NO.2 OF 2015 I.A. NO.2/2015 IN W.P. (C ) NO.3 OF 2015 I.A. NO.1/2015 IN W.P. (C ) NO.6 OF 2015 W.P. (C ) NO.27 OF 2015 I.A. NOS.1-4 IN W.P. (C ) NO.1064 OF 2014 I.A. NO.11-12/2007 IN W.P. (C ) NO.477 OF 1996 W.P.(C) No. 122 OF 2015

O R D E R 

I.A. NO.13 OF 2014 
Mr. V. Giri, learned senior counsel seeks permission to withdraw this application in order to move the appropriate forum. The prayer is allowed. I.A. No.13, accordingly, dismissed as withdrawn. 

We have heard learned counsel for all the parties including the learned counsel appearing in the writ petitions as also in the other interlocutory applications.

At the very outset, we are not inclined to entertain these writ petitions and interlocutory applications, except Interlocutory Application NOs.8 and 9 in Writ Petition (Civil) No.876 of 1996, and to adjudicate their title in respect of the area where they alleged to have been in occupation. Those writ petitions and interlocutory applications are hereby dismissed.

However, the writ petitioners and the other petitioners who have filed interlocutory applications are given liberty to move the appropriate forum by filing suits/other proceedings for adjudication of their title and possession.

The interim order, if any, passed in these writ petitions and interlocutory applications shall continue to be in force for a period of three months so that they may file applications before the Court where suits or proceedings that may be filed and pray for interim relief.

It is made clear that while hearing the interlocutory applications or passing order, the Court concerned shall not be prejudiced by the orders passed 2 by this Court. We further direct that the suits or proceedings, if any, that may be filed by these persons shall be decided as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of one year.

So far as the interest of the petitioners in IA.Nos. 8 and 9 is concerned, having regard to the orders passed by this Court on 17.7,.2013, 10.7.2014 and 4.8.2014, before we finally adjudicate the matter, we direct the Director General (DG), Town and Country Planning to file a fresh affidavit giving the details of the land available, excluding the land alleged to have been occupied by the encroachers or persons claiming title and also under general category and to state how the persons who have been allotted as far back as in the year 1986 and thereafter shall be accommodated.

It has come from the Bar that it is the builder who is actually involved in the distribution of plots and also alleged to have been committed fraud by transferring the same plot to more than one persons. The builder is, therefore, directed to file an affidavit giving his explanation and also to state as to how the persons interested shall be accommodated in the land.

In so far as those interlocutory applications filed by the persons other than the alleged encroachers 3 or persons claiming title, they may, if so advised, move the High Court for redressal of the grievance.

Put up I.A. Nos. 8 and 9 in Writ Petition (Civil) No.876 of 1996 after six weeks.

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A 

I.A.NO. 44/2013 AND I.A. NO. 1/2015 
Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 113/1996 

OKHLA ENCLAVE JOINT ACTION COMMITTEE Petitioner(s) VERSUS U O I & ORS Respondent(s) (for directions and impleadment and office report) WITH I.A. No. 9 in W.P.(C) No. 792 of 1996 (For directions) I.A. NOS. 8-9, CRL.M.P. No......./2010 in I.A. No. 8, I.A. Nos. 10, 13-24, I.A. Nos. 1-170 and I.A. No. 1 in I.A. No. 58 in I.A. Nos. 8 and 9 in W.P.(C) No. 876 of 1996 (For permission and impleadment and directions and clarification and office report) W.P.(C) No. 1037/2014 (With appln. For stay) I.A. No. 1/2015 in W.P.(c) No. 2 of 2015 (For stay and office report) I.A. No.2/2015 in W.P.(C) No. 3/2015 (For stay and office report) I.A. No.1/2015 in W.P.(C) No. 6/2015 (With appln.(s) for stay and Office Report) W.P.(C) No. 27/2015 (With appln.(s) for stay and Office Report) I.A. Nos. 1-4 in W.P.(C) No. 1064/2014 (With appln.(s) for stay and appln.(s) for permission to file additional documents and appln.(s) for exemption from filing O.T. and Office Report) I.A. Nos. 11-12/2007 in W.P.(C) No. 477/1996 (For directions and office report) W.P.(C) No. 122/2015 (With appln.(s) for stay and Office Report) 5 Date : 15/07/2015 These applications and writ petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.Y. EQBAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. NAGAPPAN

Amicus Curiae Mr. Raju Ramachandran,
Sr.Adv. For the appearing parties : Ms. Minakshi Vij,Adv. Mr. P. Narasimhan,Adv. Ms. Sumita Hazarika,Adv. Mr. Santosh Kumar, Adv. Mr. Rajeev Ranjan Mishra, Adv. Mr. V. Sushant Gupta, Adv. For Mr. Mushtaq Ahmad,Adv. Ms. Susmita Lal,Adv. Mr. Mohit D. Ram,Adv. Ms. Monisha Handa, adv. Mr. Manan Kumar Mishra, Sr.Adv. Mr. Anjani Kumar Mishra,Adv. Ms. Anjkul Dwivedi, Adv. Mr. H.K. Puri Adv. Dr. Monika Gusain,Adv. Mr. Azim H. Laskar, Adv. Mr. Sachin Das, Adv. Mr. Abhijit Sengupta,Adv. Mr. Arun K. Sinha,Adv. Mr. Kishan Datta,Adv. Mr. P. Narasimhan,Adv. Mr. Prem Malhotra,Adv. Mr. Rajesh Kumar,Adv. Mr. Ranbir Singh Yadav,Adv. 6 Mr. T. V. George,Adv. Mr. V. Sivasubramanian,Adv. M/s. Khaitan & Co.,Adv. Mr. Ram Kishor Singh Yadav,Adv. Mr. H. K. Puri,Adv. Mr. P. Parmeswaran,Adv. Mr. Shahid Anwar, adv. Mr. Amit Pawan, adv. Mr. P.K. Dey, Adv. Mr. T.A. Khan, Adv. Mr. Kumar Parimal, Adv. Mr. B.V. Balram Das, Adv. Ms. Gunwant Dara, Adv. Mr. D.S. Mahra, Adv. Mr. E.C. Vidya Sagar, Adv. Mr. Pramod Kumar, Adv. Mr. G. Ramakrishna Prasad, Adv. Mr. P. Narasimhan, Adv. Mr. P.N. Puri, Adv. Mr. P.P. Kanwar, Adv. Mr. Ranbir Singh Yadav, Adv. Mr. S. Rajappa, Adv. Mr. Sudarshan Rajan, Adv. Ms. Sumita Hazarika, Adv. Petitioner-in-person Dr. S.K. Verma, Adv. Mr. Arun K. Sinha, Adv. Mr. Bimal Roy Jad, Adv. Mr. Dinesh Chandra Pandey, Adv. 7 Mr. Sudarshan Rajan, Adv. Ms. Shriya Raj Chauhan, Adv. Mr. K.B. Sounder Rajan, Adv. Mr. Vikrant Yadav, Adv. Mr. M.C. Dhingra, Adv. Mr. Munawwar Naseem Adv. Mr. B.A. Khan, Sr.Adv. Mr. Piyush Sharma, Adv. Mr. B.A. Khan, Sr.Adv. Mr. P. Parmeswaran, Adv. Mr. B.A. Khan, Sr.Adv. Mr. Prakash Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Arup Banerjee, Adv. Mr. S. Ritam Khare, Adv. Mr. B.R. Jad, adv. Mr. P. Narasimhan, Adv. Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Adv. Mr. Shailendra Bhardwaj, Adv. Ms. Aroma S. Bhardwaj, Adv. Mr. Shekhar Kumar Adv. Mr. S.K. Verma, Adv. Mrs. Rani Chhabra, Adv. Mr. Subhash Sharma, Adv. Mr. K.N. Madhusoodhanan, Adv. Mr. T.G. Narayanan Nair, Adv. Mr. Soumyajit Pani, Adv. Mr. Rahul Bhandari, Adv. Mr. A.V. Manavalan, adv. Mr. Vinodh Kanna B., Adv. Mr. V. Sivasubramanian, Adv. Mr. Yashpal Dhingra, Adv. Mr. Brijendra Singh, Adv. Ms. Jaspreet Gogia, Adv. 8 Ms. Jyotika Kalra, Adv. For M/s Khaitan & Co., Advs. Mr. Mohit Chaudhary, Adv. Ms. Puja Sharma, Adv. Ms. Vaishali Mittal, Adv. Ms. Sadhana Sandhu, Adv. Mr. Nitin Bhardwaj, Adv. Mr. D.K. Sharma, Adv. Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, adv. Mr. N.K. Verma, Adv. Mr. Shivam Garg, Adv. Mr. Rama Shankar, Adv. Mr. Brijendra Singh, Adv. Mr. Anoop Kumar Srivastava, Adv. Mr. Mohit D. Ram, Adv. Ms. Susmita Lal, Adv. Mr. Apurb Lal, Adv. Mr. Ashesh Lal, Adv. Ms. Neha Garg, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Jain, Adv. Ms. Preeti Singh, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Jain, Adv. Mr. Amarjit Singh Bedi, Adv. Mr. Srisatya Mohanty, Adv. Ms. Priyanjali Singh, Adv. Mr. Naresh Kumar, Adv. Mr. B.S. Maan, adv. Ms. Simita Maan, Adv. Mr. Hitesh Kumar Sharma, adv. Mr. M.A. Chinnasamy, Adv. Mr. Ansar Ahmad Chaudhary, Adv. Mr. Ekansh Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Sanjeev Agarwal, Adv. 9 Ms. Anitha Shenoy, Adv. Mr. Merusagar Samantaray, Adv. Mr. Kishan Datta, Adv. Mr. Subramonium Prasad, Adv. Mr. Kamal Mohan Gupta, Adv. Mr. D.C. Pandey, adv. Mr. Piyush Sharma, adv. Mr. U.P. Singh, Adv. Mr. V. Giri, Sr.Adv. Mr. Rahul Malhotra, Adv. Mr. Jay Kishor Singh, Adv. State of Haryana Mr. Anil Grover, AAG Ms. Nupur Singhal, adv. Dr. Monika Gusain, Adv. Mr. Satish Kapoor, Adv. Mr. Brijendra Singh, Adv. Mr. H.M. Singh, Adv. Mr. Anil Hooda, Adv. Mr. Prashant Kumar, Adv. Mr. Ankit Gupta, Adv. Mr. Jitender Hooda, Adv. For Mr. R.K.S. Yadav, adv.

 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following

 O R D E R 

I.A. No.13 of 2014 is dismissed as withdrawn.

All the writ petitions and interlocutory applications except Interlocutory application Nos. 8 and 9 in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 876 of 1996 are dismissed.

The interim order, if any, passed in these writ petitions and interlocutory applications shall continue to be in force for a period of three months.

Put up I.A. Nos. 8 and 9 in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 876 of 1996 after six weeks. 

Our case is already stands adjudicated in our favour in the year 2008. Now, your forum is free to pursue its legal case before the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in contempt petition.

Please log-on this blogger regularly for latest developments in the case.

Thanks & regards,



Thursday, April 16, 2015

Updates - Orders dated 15.04.2015

Dear member, 

UPON hearing the counsel on 15.04.2015, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has  made the following :-

    In compliance of this Court's order dated 10.02.2015, a final and factual report has been submitted by Ms. Anitha Shenoy, learned Co-Amicus Curiae in consultation with Mr.Raju Ramachandran, learned Amicus Curiae, on 10.04.2015.
    Learned counsel appearing for the persons concerned request for supply of copy of that report.

    Ms. Anitha Shenoy, learned Co-Amicus Curiae, submits that if the e-mail addresses are provided, soft copy of the said report shall be forwarded to those e-mail addresses of the learned counsel appearing for the parties. So far as other persons who could not be able to supply their respective e-mail addresses, they may take copy of the said report from other counsel.

     The report shall be forwarded to the e-mail addresses of the learned counsel appearing for the parties within 24 hours from the time when the e-mail addresses are provided.

     List the matters after four weeks on any non-miscellaneous day.

     In the meantime, if any person has any objections to the said report, he may file his respective affidavits.

Case may likely to be listed on

Please log-on this blogger regularly for latest developments in the case.
Thanks & regards,