Research › Browse › Judgment

Supreme Court of India · body

2020 DIGILAW 272 (SC)

Anun Dhawan v. Union of India

2020-02-17

N.V.RAMANA, V.RAMASUBRAMANIAN

body2020
ORDER : 1. In spite of directions given by this Court vide order dated 10.02.2020, the following States are stated to have not filed their counter affidavits/documents: (i) NCT of Delhi; (ii) State of Maharashtra; (iii) State of Manipur; (iv) State of Odisha; (v) State of Goa; (vi) State of Kerala; (vii) State of Sikkim; (viii) State of Telangana; and (ix) U.T. of Ladakh. 2. During the course of hearing, Mr. Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State of Manipur submits that as the erstwhile advocate – Mr. L. Roshmani has expired and he has recently been appointed as the standing counsel for the said State, he could not file the counter affidavit on behalf of the State within the prescribed period. Accepting the submission of the learned counsel, we allow him to file the counter affidavit during the course of the day along with costs of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh). 3. Mr. G. Prakash, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State of Kerala also submits that due to some personal difficulty, he could not file the counter affidavit on behalf of the State. We accordingly, exempt him from paying the costs, as directed by this Court vide order dated 10.02.2020, and direct him to file the counter affidavit within a week. 4. The States of Maharashtra, Odisha, Goa, Sikkim, NCT of Delhi and U.T. of Ladakh are directed to file their counter affidavits within a period of one week from today after depositing costs of Rs.5,00,000/-(Rupees five lakhs), in addition to the costs already imposed by this Court vide order dated 10.02.2020, before the Registrar (Judl.) of this Court. 5. The application(s) for waiver of costs filed on behalf of the States of Himachal Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Bihar, Tripura, Chhatisgarh, Assam, U.P. and U.T. of Chandigarh are rejected. They are directed to deposit the requisite costs within a period of one week, as directed by this Court vide Order dated 10.02.2020, if the same has not already been deposited. 6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State of Gujarat submits that the Registry has not accepted the counter affidavit of the State because service of the same was not complete. As per Office Report dated 15.02.2020, she has filed the counter affidavit dated 11.02.2020 on 12.02.2020 and has also deposited the cost of Rs. One lakh. 6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State of Gujarat submits that the Registry has not accepted the counter affidavit of the State because service of the same was not complete. As per Office Report dated 15.02.2020, she has filed the counter affidavit dated 11.02.2020 on 12.02.2020 and has also deposited the cost of Rs. One lakh. In view of the aforesaid, we direct the Registry to take on record the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State of Gujarat. 7. Ms. Bina Madhavan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State of Telangana submits that she has already deposited Rs.1,00,000/- as costs but could not file the counter affidavit. We accordingly allow her to file the counter affidavit by 18.02.2020. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioner is willing to take the responsibility to compile the entire materials including the affidavits filed by the parties. She is accordingly directed to prepare a compilation of the entire materials placed by the parties before the next date of hearing. 9. List on 08.04.2020.