State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. State of Nagaland & Ors.
EmailAppeal: Civil Appeal Nos. 8858-61 of 1997 etc.
(Arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 21304-21307/91)
With
Transfer Petition (C) Nos. 418-421 of 1997
(From the Judgment and Order dated 13.10.1997 of the Gauhati High Court in C.R. No. 4986 of 1997)
(Arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 21304-21307/91)
With
Transfer Petition (C) Nos. 418-421 of 1997
(From the Judgment and Order dated 13.10.1997 of the Gauhati High Court in C.R. No. 4986 of 1997)
Petitioner: State of Uttar Pradesh
Respondent: State of Nagaland & Ors.
Apeal: Civil Appeal Nos. 8858-61 of 1997 etc.
(Arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 21304-21307/91)
With
Transfer Petition (C) Nos. 418-421 of 1997
(From the Judgment and Order dated 13.10.1997 of the Gauhati High Court in C.R. No. 4986 of 1997)
(Arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 21304-21307/91)
With
Transfer Petition (C) Nos. 418-421 of 1997
(From the Judgment and Order dated 13.10.1997 of the Gauhati High Court in C.R. No. 4986 of 1997)
Judges: SUHAS C. SEN & M. JAGANNADHA RAO, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Dec 17, 1997
Appearances:
Mr. Ashok H. Desai, Attorney General of India, and Mr. A.K. Goel, Advocate General, Mr. Kavin Gulati, Mr. Pradeep Misra, Mr. R.B. Misra, Mr. Kamlendra Misra, Advocates with him for the Appellant.
Mr. Shanti Bhushan, Mr. P.K. Goswami, Dr. A.M. Singhvi, Senior Advocates, Mr. C.K. Sasi, Mr. Kailash Vasdev, Mr. Pradeep Agar-wal, Mr. N.B. Khatwada, Ms. Pratibha Jain, Mr. Goodwill Indeevar, Advocates with them for the Respondents.
Head Note:
WRIT PETITION
Application for Transfer – Held that the writ petition having been heard at length and judgment is likely to be pronounced shortly not a fit case for interference in an interim order – No order is also passed in Transfer Application.
JUDGEMENT:
O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. Although elaborate arguments have been advanced by the Attorney-General on behalf of the State of Uttar Pradesh, the Solicitor General on behalf of the Union of India and Mr. Shanti Bhushan on behalf of the State of Nagaland. We will not go into the merits of the case at all. We have been informed that the writ petition even at the admission stage has been heard at length. The judgment is awaited. This is only an appeal from an interim order. Since the judgment is going to be pronounced shortly we are disinclined to interfere with the interim order passed at this stage. We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. The Court hearing this matter will be entirely free to decide the case in accordance with law. The appeals are disposed of accordingly.
T.P. Nos. 418-421/97
3. In view of the above decision in SLP (C) Nos. 21304-07/97, no order is passed on the Transfer Petitions at this Stage. The Transfer Petitions are also disposed of accordingly.
1. Leave granted.
2. Although elaborate arguments have been advanced by the Attorney-General on behalf of the State of Uttar Pradesh, the Solicitor General on behalf of the Union of India and Mr. Shanti Bhushan on behalf of the State of Nagaland. We will not go into the merits of the case at all. We have been informed that the writ petition even at the admission stage has been heard at length. The judgment is awaited. This is only an appeal from an interim order. Since the judgment is going to be pronounced shortly we are disinclined to interfere with the interim order passed at this stage. We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. The Court hearing this matter will be entirely free to decide the case in accordance with law. The appeals are disposed of accordingly.
T.P. Nos. 418-421/97
3. In view of the above decision in SLP (C) Nos. 21304-07/97, no order is passed on the Transfer Petitions at this Stage. The Transfer Petitions are also disposed of accordingly.
