IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

[CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION]

SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) No. OF 2019

WITH PRAYER OF INTERIM RELIEF

[Against the final common judgment & order dated 29-1-2019 passed by the
Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Case:-Special Appeal Defective
Nos.85 & 79 of 2019]

IN THE MATTER OF:

AMAR NATH MISHRA & Etc. …...... PETITIONERS

//Versus//

KANPUR ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LTD. .. ..…RESPONDENT

 //WITH//
I.A No. /2019:: An application for exemption from filing O.T.
 

     

PAPER BOOK

(FOR INDEX PLEASE SEE INSIDE)

[ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER: -S.R.SETIA ]

INDEX
Sl. Particulars of Document Page No. Remarks
No. of part to Part -I Part- II
which it (Contents (Contents
belongs of Paper of file alone
Book) )
(i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v)
1 Court Fee Rs.
2. O/R on Limitation A A
3. Listing Proforma A-1—A2 A-1—A2
4. Cover Page of Paper A-3
Book
5. Index of Record of A-4
Proceedings
6. Limitation Report A-5
prepared by the
Registry
7. Defect List A-6 to
8. Note Sheet NS 1 to …..
9. List of Dates B—

10. i) Copy of the final

final common judgment
& order dated 29-1-
2019 passed by the
Hon’ble High Court of
Judicature at Allahabad
Case:-Special Appeal
Defective No.85 of
2019.
ii) Copy of the final
final common judgment
& order dated 29-1-
2019 passed by the
Hon’ble High Court of
Judicature at Allahabad
Case:-Special Appeal
Defective No.79 of
2019.

11. Special Leave Petition

(C) with affidavit.

12. APPENDIX OF
RELEVANT
PROVISION ::
Under section 10(2) of
the U.P. Imposition of
Ceiling on Land
Holdings Act 1960. And
Under Rule – 8.

13. ANNEXURE-P/1:: A
translated copy of the
order dated 27-07-84
passed by the Court of
Prescribed Authority
Konch, District- Jalaun
 in Suit No.173 u/s
10{2} ceiling.

14. ANNEXURE-P/2 A
true translated copy of
the order dated 17-6-
86 passed by the Court
of Sh. Awadh Sharan,
Addl. Commissioner
Jhansi Division, Jhansi
(U.P.) in M.C.A. No.
98/112/62 {85-86}.

15. ANNEXURE-P/3 A
true copy of the order
dated 3-5-2017 passed
by the Hon’ble High
Court of Judicature at
Allahabad in C.M.
Substitution Appl. No.
198271/2016 in Case:-
Writ- C No.13243 of
1986.
17.
I..A. No. /2018:: An
application for
exemption from filing
O.T.
18.
F/M
19. V/A

20. Memo of party

******************

SECTION XI

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. … . OF 2019

IN THE MATTER OF ::
AMAR NATH MISHRA & Etc. …...... PETITIONERS

//Versus//

KANPUR ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LTD. .. ..…RESPONDENT

INDEX OF FILING

S.No. DESCRIPTION COPIES COURT FEES

1. Listing Performa 1 + 3
2. List of Dates 1 + 3

3. Copy of the final common judgment 1 + 3

& order dated 29-1-2019 passed by
the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature
at Allahabad Case:-Special Appeal
Defective Nos.85 & 79 of 2019.
.
4. Special Leave Petition [Civil] with 1 + 3
affidavit .

5. ANNEXURE-P/1 to P/ 1 + 3

6. I.A. No. /2019 [An application 1 + 3

for Exemption from filing O.T.
7.

8.

9. Vakalatnama and Memo of

Appearance.

(S.R. SETIA ) Code No. 714

Advocate for the petitioner
New Delhi. 323, New Lawyers Chamber’s
Dated: -5- 2019 Supreme Court of India
Ph: 23070061,9810624922(M)
E-Mail:- srsetia34@gmail.com

SECTION XI

PROFORMA FOR FIRST LISTING

THE CASE PERTAINS TO (PLEASE TICK/CHECK THE CORRECT BOX.)

Central Act: (Title) The Constitution of India
Section :U/Article 12, 21, 39 & 16 of the Constitution of India
Central Rule: (Title) N.A
 Rule No(s) N.A
State Act: (Title) U.P. Industrial Dispute Act 1947
And Apprentice Act ,1961
Section: Under section 4 F and Rule 5
State Rule: (Title) under Section 4 F
Rule No(s): N.A.
Impugned Interim order: (Date) NO

Impugned Final Order/Decree: (Date)::29-1-2019

High Court: (Name) Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at

Allahabad
Names of Judges: Hon’ble Mr.Justice Vikram Nath & Hon’ble
Mr. Justice Pradeep Kumar Srivastava J., J.
Tribunal/Authority: (Name) N.A.

1. Nature of Matter: Civil

2.(a) Petitioner/Appellant No.1: Amar Nath Mishra & Etc.
(b) e-mail ID: N.A.
(c) Mobile Phone Number: N.A.
3.(a) Respondent No.1: Kanpur Electricity Supply Company Ltd.
(b) e-mail ID: N.A.
(c) Mobile Phone Number: N.A.
4.(a) Main Category classification: 06 Service Matters
(b) Sub classification: 0613::Others
5. Not to be listed before: N.A.
6. (a) Similar disposed of matter with citation.
If any, & case details.:: No disposed of matter
(b) Similar pending with case details. No similar matter pending

7. Criminal Matters:
(a) Whether accused /convict has surrendered: NO
(b) FIR No. N.A. Date: N.A
(c) Police Station : N.A.

(d) Sentence Awarded: N.A.

(e) Sentence Undergone: N.A.
8. Land Acqauisition Matters:
(a) Date of Section 4 Notification : N.A.
(b) Date of Section 6 Notification: N.A.
(c) Date of Section 17 notification: N.A.
9. Tax Matter: State the tax effect: N.A.
10. Special Category: (first petitioner/appellant only): N.A.
Senior citizen > 65 years SC/ST Woman/Child Disabled
Legal Aid Case In custody
11. Vehicle Number (in case of Motor Accident Claim matters): N.A.

Date- -4-2019 (S. R. SETIA)

AOR: Advocate for the Petitioner (s)
 Registration No.714
Ph.23070061
E-Mail:- srsetia34@gmail.com

”A”
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. … . OF 2019

IN THE MATTER OF ::
AMAR NATH MISHRA & Etc. …...... PETITIONERS

//Versus//

KANPUR ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LTD. .. ..…RESPONDENT

OFFICE REPORT ON LIMITATION

1. The Petition is /are within limitation.

2. The Petition is barred by time and there is delay of ……days in filing

the same against Order dated 29–1-2019 and petition for

ondonation of …………days delay has been filed.

 3. There is delay of ………. days in Refiling the petition and petition for

Condonation of ……….. days delay in Refiling has been filed.

New Delhi (Branch Officer)

Supreme Court of India

Date:- -4-2019
 SYNOPSIS & LIST OF DATES

That the Petitioners are filing the present special leave petition against the

final judgment & order dated 23-1-2019 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of

Judicature at Allahabad in Case:- Special Appeal Defective Nos. 79 & 85 of

2019, whereby the Hon’ble High Court has been pleased to dismiss the Special

Appeal filed by the Petitioner challenging the order dated 12.11.2018 passed

by the Hon’ble High Court in Writ Petition of the respondent herein.

The Petitioner No. 1- Amar Nath Mishra was appointed as an Apprentice under

Apprentice Act, 1961 on 01.07.1987 for a period of 3 years and his services

was illegally terminated w.e.f 30.06.1990.

The Petitioner No. 2- Manoj Kumar Shukla was appointed as an Apprentice

under Apprentice Act, 1961 on the post of store keeper on 10.10.1988 for a

period of one year and his services was illegally terminated w.e.f 09.10.1989.

Both the petitioners challenged their termination order passed by the

respondent before Ld. Labor Court and Ld. Labor Court passed the award in

favor of the petitioners and petitioners were directed to be reinstated with the

back wages.

Aggrieved with the awards passed by the Ld. Labor Court in favor of the

Petitioners, respondent filed Writ Petitions which were dismissed by the Ld.

Single Judge on the ground that there was no contract of apprenticeship

between the petitioners and respondent. The respondent challenged aforesaid

orders before this Hon’ble Court and same was allowed by this Hon’ble Court

on 01.10.2004.

It is most important to mention here that one Ram Tilak S/o Mr. Chhedi Lal

was also appointed as apprentice under the Apprentice Act, 1961, who was

also terminated on 15.12.1983. He was also filed a case before labor court

and award was passed in his favor same as petitioners herein. The same

award was challenged by the respondent in Writ Petition before the Hon’ble
High Court. During the pendency of aforesaid writ petition, the Ram Tilak was

reinstated in service as result of compromise taken place between the

respondent and ram tilak vide office memo dated 21.03.2006.

The petitioners moved the applications to the respondent for taking him in

service, however, respondent rejected the same by its letter dated

02.11.2007.

Thereafter, petitioners were challenging the letter dated 02.11.2007, filed writ

petition nos. 73372 of 2010 and 73379 of 2010 before Hon,ble High Court,

same was dismissed by the Hon’ble Court on 12.11.2018 on the ground that

“no material has been brought on record by the petitioner in support of his

claim that the aforesaid Ram Tilak is a similarly situated person”.

It is most important to submit here that the Hon’ble High Court fails to

consider the facts of the case which shows the Mr. Ram Tilak and petitioners

stand on same place and petitioners also should be appointed as Ram Tilak

was appointed.

It is most important to submit here that the Hon’ble High Court fails to

consider that the petitioners were fulfilling all terms required for appointment

as appointed Ram Tilak.

Petitioners aggrieved by the aforesaid order dated 12.11.2018, filed special

appeal before Hon’ble High court and same was dismissed by the Hon’ble High

Court vide impugned order dated 29.01.2019.

However, Hon’ble High fails to consider that the Ld. single judge has been

dismissed the Writ Petition on the ground that this Hon’ble Court has been

already decided and set aside the said award while petitioners herein was filed

the Writ petition challenging the letter dated 02.11.2007 and praying inter alia

that directed the respondent to reinstate the petitioners.

01.07.1987 The Petitioner No. 1- Amar Nath Mishra was

appointed as an Apprentice under Apprentice Act,

1961 on 01.07.1987 for a period of 3 years and his

services was terminated w.e.f 30.06.1990.

10.10.1988 The Petitioner No. 2- Manoj Kumar Shukla was

appointed as an Apprentice under Apprentice Act,

1961 on the post of store keeper on 10.10.1988 for a

period of one year and his services was terminated

w.e.f 09.10.1989.

28.01.1997 The petitioner No. 2 challenged their termination

order passed by the respondent before Ld. Labor

Court vide case No. 77/93. The Ld. Labor Court

passed the award in favor of the petitioner No. 2 and

directed the respondent to reinstate the petitioner No.

2 with the back wages.

11.10.1993 The petitioner No. 1 challenged their termination

order passed by the respondent before Ld. Labor

Court vide case No. 252/1992. The Ld. Labor Court

passed the award in favor of the petitioner No. 1 and

directed the respondent to reinstate the petitioner No.

1 with the back wages.

12.04.2002 & Aggrieved with the awards passed by the Ld. Labor

15.07.2003 Court in favor of the Petitioners, respondent filed Writ

Petitions Nos. 29962 of 1994 and 24915 of 1998

which were dismissed by the Ld. Single Judge vide its

orders dated 12.04.2002 and 15.07.2003 respectively

on the ground that there was no contract of

apprenticeship between the petitioners and

respondent.
01.10.2004 The respondent challenged aforesaid orders before

this Hon’ble Court and same was allowed by this

Hon’ble Court on 01.10.2004.

21.03.2006 It is most important to mention here that one Ram

Tilak S/o Mr. Chhedi Lal was also appointed a

apprentice under the Apprentice Act, 1961, who was

also terminated on 15.12.1983. He was filed a case

 ****************

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

[CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION]

SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) No. OF 2019

WITH PRAYER OF INTERIM RELIEF

[Against the final common judgment & order dated 29-1-2019 passed by the
Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Case:-Special Appeal Defective
Nos.85 & 79 of 2019]

Between:
Position of
the parties

In the High In this Court

Special Appeal Defective Court
I.
No.85/2019

Amar Nath Mishra Appellant Petitioner

S/o Shri Shiv Swaroop Mishra,
R/o- L.I.G Barra-4, Janta Nagar,
Kanpur Nagar (U.P.)

//VERSUS//
 Kanpur Electricity Supply Company Ltd. Respondent Contesting
Through its Managing Director, Respondent
KESCO HOUSE: 14/71, Civil Lines,
Kanpur, District- Kanpur (U.P.)

Special Appeal Defective

II.
No.79/2019

Manoj Kumar Shukla Appellant Petitioner

S/o Shri Kamla Kant Shukla,
R/o-83-A/26, Juhi Khurd, Kanpur Nagar,
District- Kanpur Nagar (U.P.)

//VERSUS//

Kanpur Electricity Supply Company Ltd. Respondent Contesting

Through its Managing Director, Respondent
KESCO HOUSE: 14/71, Civil Lines,
Kanpur, District- Kanpur (U.P.)

To,

The Hon’ble Chief Justice of India and his Companion Justices of the Supreme

Court of India, New Delhi

The Humble Petition of the

Petitioner above named.

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:-

1. That the Petitioner herein has filed the present Special Leave Petition

against the final common judgment & order dated 29-1-2019 passed by

the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Case:-Special Appeal

Defective Nos.85 & 79 of 2019, whereby the Hon’ble High Court has

been pleased to dismiss the Special Appeal filed by the Petitioners.

 2. QUESTION OF LAW :

The present petition for Special Leave to Appeal raises the following

substantial questions of law.

A. Whether the Hon’ble High Court fails to consider the facts of the

case which shows the petitioners stand equally with mr. Ram Tilak

who was appointed earlier in terms of compromise by office memo

dated 21.03.2006?

B. Whether the Hon’ble High Court fails to consider that the petitioners

were fulfilling all the terms on which compromise executed between

the respondent and Mr. Ram Tilak and as a result appointed the

Mr. Ram Tilak ?.

C. Whether the Hon’ble High fails to consider that the Ld. single judge

has been dismissed the Writ Petition on the ground that this

Hon’ble Court has been already decided the matter and set aside

the said award while petitioners herein was filed the Writ petition

challenging the letter dated 02.11.2007 and praying inter alia that

directed the respondent to reinstate the petitioners?

D. Whether the Hon’ble High fails to consider that the respondent

discriminated the petitioners by not considering the application of

the petitioners for reinstatement on the post on they were trained

while appointment of Mr. Ram Tilak was confirmed by office memo

dated 21.03.2006 in terms of compromise during the pendency of

the Writ Petition?

3. DECLARATION IN TERMS OF RULE 3 (2) :

The petitioner states that no other petition seeking leave to file a

Petition for Special Leave to Appeal has been filed by him against the

impugned Final common judgment & order dated 29-1-2019 passed by

 the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Case:-Special Appeal

Defective Nos.85 & 79 of 2019.

4. DECLATION IN TERMS OF RULE 5 :

The Annexures P-1 to P- produced along with the Special Leave

Petition are true copies of the pleading s/documents which formed part

of the records of the case in the Court /Tribunal below against whose

order the leave to Appeal is sought for in this petition.

5. GROUNDS

That the Petitioner is filing the present Special Leave Petition on the

following amongst other::

GROUNDS

A. Because the Hon’ble High Court fails to consider the facts of the

case which shows the petitioners stand equally with mr. Ram Tilak

who was appointed earlier in terms of compromise by office memo

dated 21.03.2006.

B. Because the Hon’ble High Court fails to consider that the petitioners

were fulfilling all the terms on which compromise executed between

the respondent and Mr. Ram Tilak and as a result appointed the

Mr. Ram Tilak.

C. Because the Hon’ble High fails to consider that the Ld. single judge

has been dismissed the Writ Petition on the ground that this

Hon’ble Court has been already decided the matter and set aside

the said award while petitioners herein was filed the Writ petition

challenging the letter dated 02.11.2007 and praying inter alia that

directed the respondent to reinstate the petitioners.

 D. Because the Hon’ble High fails to consider that the respondent

discriminated the petitioners by not considering the application of

the petitioners for reinstatement on the post on they were trained

while appointment of Mr. Ram Tilak was confirmed by office memo

dated 21.03.2006 in terms of compromise during the pendency of

the Writ Petition.

6. GROUNDS FOR INTERIM RELIEF:

No interim relief is prayed for.

7. MAIN PRAYER

For the facts, circumstances and grounds set out herein above, it is

respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to::

a) Grant Special Leave to Appeal to the Petitioner against the final

common judgment & order dated 29-1-2019 passed by the Hon’ble

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Case:-Special Appeal

Defective Nos.85 & 79 of 2019;and

b) Pass such other or further order (s) which this Hon’ble Court may

deem fit and proper in the facts of the case.

8. PRAYER FOR INTERIM RELIEF:

No interim relief is prayed for

AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS AND JUSTICE, YOUR

PETITIONER, AS IN DUTY BOUND, SHALL EVER PRAY.

Filed on: -4-2019 Filed by

(S.R.SETIA)
Advocate for the Petitioners
 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. … . OF 201 9

IN THE MATTER OF ::
AMAR NATH MISHRA & Etc. …...... PETITIONERS

//Versus//

KANPUR ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LTD. .. ..…RESPONDENT

CERTIFICATE

Certified that the Special Leave Petition [C] is confined only to the

pleadings before the Court/ whose order is Challenged and the other

documents relied upon in those proceedings. No additional facts, documents

or grounds have been taken therein or relied upon in the Special Leave

Petition. It is further certified that the copies of the document/ Annexures

attached to the Special Leave Petition are necessary to answer the questions

of law raised in the petition or to make out grounds urged in the Special Leave

Petition for consideration of this Hon’ble Court. This certificate is given on the

basis of the instructions given by the petitioner/ person authorized by the

petitioner whose Affidavit is filed in support of the S.L.P.

FLED BY

FILED ON: -4-2019

(S.R.SETIA )

ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

I A. NO. OF 2019

IN

SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) No. OF 2019

IN THE MATTER OF :-

AMAR NATH MISHRA & Etc. …...... PETITIONERS

//Versus//

KANPUR ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LTD. .. ..…RESPONDENT

AN APPLICATION FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING OFFICIAL

TRANSLATION OF ANNEXURES P-1 To P-2 ANNEXED TO THE

SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION.

To,

The Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India and His Companion Justices of the

Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.

The humble petition of the

Petitioner abovenamed

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

1. That the Petitioner herein has filed the present Special Leave Petition

against the final judgment and order dated 14-11-2018 passed by the

Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Case:-Writ- C No.13243

of 1986, whereby the Hon’ble Court has been pleased to dismiss the

Writ Petition filed by the Petitioners.

2. That since the original of Annexures P-1 to P2 is in Hindi, the

petitioner in order to avoid any delay in the hearing of the case has got
 the same translated through his local counsel and is filing the true English

translation thereof and prays that he may be exempted from filing this

annexure translated officially.

PRAYER

Therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be

pleased to:-

a) exempt the petitioner from filing the Official Translation of

Annexures P- 1 to P-2 ; and

b) pass any other or further orders as may be deemed fit and proper in

the Circumstances of the Case.

AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS THE PETITIONER AS IN DUTY

BOUND SHALL EVER PRAY.

Filed on:-14 -12-2018 FILED BY

(S.R.Setia)

Advocate of the Petitioners

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CASE :- WRIT –C NO. 13243 OF 1986

MEMO OF PARTIES

Harendra Singh (Died) Through LRs. & Ors.

1/1. Smt.Asha Devi, W/o Late Harendra Singh,

1/2. Rahul Singh, S/o Late Harendra Singh,
1/3. Rohit Singh, S/o Late Harendra Singh,
1/4. Mohit Singh, S/o Late Harendra Singh,
All are Petitioner No.1 to 4,
R/o Village- Ingui Madhogarh,
P.O. Konch, Pargana- Konch,
District- Jalaun (U.P.) ……….. Applicants/Petitioners
//VERSUS//
1. State of Uttar Pradesh
Through its Secretary,
Department of Imposition of Ceiling on Land,
Govt. of U.P. State Secretariat Lucknow (U.P.)
2. The Additional Commissioner,
Jhansi Division, Jhansi,
District-Jhansi (U.P.)
3. The Prescribed Authority (Collector),
Konch, Pargana- Konch,
District- Jalaun (U.P.) …….…….Respondents
4. Vijai Bahadur
Adopted S/o Shri Hanumat Singh,

5 Punya Pratap Singh, S/o Shri Vijai Bahadur Singh,

6 Ratan Pratap Singh,
S/o Shri Vijai Bahadur Singh,

7 Kushalpal Singh, S/o Shri Vijai Bahadur Singh,

All are Performa-Resp. No.4 to 7,
R/o Village- Ingui Madhogarh,
P.O. Konch, Pargana- Konch,
District- Jalaun (U.P.) ……..….Performa /Respondents

Filed on -12-2017 Filed by

(S.R.SETIA)
Advocate for the petitioner
in Supreme Court of India
 1. the present Special Leave Petition against the final judgment and order

dated 02-09-2016 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at

Allahabad Case:-Writ- B No.10961 of 1975, whereby the Hon’ble Court

has been pleased to dismiss the Writ Petition filed by the Petitioner.

1A. That no Letter Patent Appeal or Writ Appeal lies before the Division

Bench of the Hon’ble High Court against the impugned order.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

I A. NO. OF 2018
 IN

SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) No. OF 2018

IN THE MATTER OF :-

Harendra Singh (Died) Through LRs. & Ors. …...... Petitioners

//Versus//

State of U.P. and Others ..…Respondents

APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN RE-FILING OF S.L.P.

To,

The Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India and His Companion Justices of the

Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.

The humble petition of the

Petitioner abovenamed

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

1. That the Petitioner herein has filed the present Special Leave Petition

against the final judgment and order dated 24-11-2016 passed by the

Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Case:-Writ- C

No.32728 of 2002, whereby the Hon’ble Court has been pleased to

dismiss the Writ Petition filed by the Petitioner.

2. That aggrieved by the said judgments the Petitioner filed special leave

petition before this Hon’ble Court on 17-2-2017.

3. That the matter were returned by the registry after marking some

defects.

4. That certain documents were required for removal of the said

defects which were not available with the Counsel and therefore

the Counsel for the Petitioner requested the Petitioner to provide

the same. Few of the documents were with the local counsel of
 the Petitioner at Allahabad and therefore the Petitioner had to go

and get the same from Allahabad.

5. That now the Petitioner has collected all the required documents

and provided the same to his Advocate-on-record and the

counsel has removed the defect and refiled the matter in the

registry after removing all the defects.

6. That however in the meanwhile some delay has been caused in

the refiling of the special leave petition. The said delay in re-

filling has been caused due to above said reasons, which were

beyond the control of the Petitioner and is bona fide and there is

no negligence on the part of the petitioner.

PRAYER

It is therefore most respectfully and humbly prayed that this Hon’ble

Court may be graciously be pleased to:-

a) condone the delay of days in Re-filing of the Special Leave

Petition ; and
b) pass such other and further order or orders as this Hon’ble
Court may deem just and proper in the fats and circumstances
of the case.
AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS THE PETITIONER AS IN DUTY

BOUND SHALL EVER PRAY.

Filed on:30-3-2017

FILED BY

(S.R.SETIA )

S.R.Setia
 Advocate Chamber:

Supreme Court of India 323, New Lawyers Chamber

Supreme Court, Bhagwan Das Road

New Delhi-110 001 Tel: 23070061

Date -12-2018

The Registrar,

Supreme Court of India,

New Delhi-110001.

Sub: Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. /2018 ::(Dy.No. /2018)

Harendra Singh (Died) Through LRs. & Ors. Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.

---------------------

Sir,

With regard to the defact No.17(ii ) filing of the gift deed dated 20-

09-1969, it is submitted that the same is not available with the petitioner. In

fact the same is not necessary for adjudicating the issue involved in the

matter. Therefore the same may please be ignored.

Thanking you,

Yours faithfully,

( S.R.Setia)

Advocate for the Petitioner