Rakesh Kumar v. State of Haryana (SC) BS628801
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Before:- J.S. Khehar and M.Y. Eqbal, JJ.

SLPs (C) Nos. 32555 of 2009. D/d. 24.2.2014.

Rakesh Kumar - Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana and others - Respondents

For the Petitioners :- Ashok Aggarwal, Advocate General, Nikhil Nayyar, Additional Advocate General, L. Nageswara Rao and T.S. Doabia, Senior Advocates (Jagjit Singh Chhabra, Shailendra Sharma, Ravinder Agarwal, Nikhil Goel, Ms. Naveen Goel, Marsook Bafaki, Ms Kavita Wadia, Ms Anubha Agarwal, Dr Monika Gusain, Kuldip Singh, Ajay Pal, Ms Naresh Bakshi, Jatinder Kr. Bhatia, Ms Rachana Joshi Issar, and Ms Ambreen Rasool, Advocates.

For the Respondents :- Manjit Singh, Advocate General (Kamal Mohan Gupta, M.K. Choudhary, Yudhister Bhardwaj, Ms Namita Choudhary, Ansar Ahmad Chaudhary, K.G. Bhagat, Ms Neha Jain, Vineet Bhagat, Lekhraj Rehalia, Debasis Misra, Himanshu Gupta, Anil Kr. Tandale, Sarad Kr. Singhania, Ms Kanchan Kaur Dhodi, Mukesh K. Verma, Sandeep "iyagi, Ashwani Bhardwaj, Ms Shikha Roy, Ajay K. Singh, Ms Nishtha Chawla, S.K. Sabharwal, Anand Mishra, Amrendra K. Singh, Dr Ms Vipin Gupta, Dinesh Verma, Rajat Sharma, Subhasish Bhowmick, Sudhir Walia, Abhishek Atrey, Yashpal Rangi, Satyendra Kumar, Kanhaiya Priyadarshi, Harish Chandra Pant, Anis Ahmed Khan, Karan Dewan, Rahul Gupta, Shish Pal Laler, N.P. Midha and Balbir Singh Gupta, Advocates).

Constitution of India, Article 141 - Reference to larger Bench - Conflicting decisions of co-ordinate Benches of Supreme Court - Difference of views between judgments in Shyam Babu Verma, (1994) 2 SCC 521 and Sahib Ram, 1995 Supp (1) SCC 18 on one hand and in Chandi Prasad Uniyal, (2012) 8 SCC 417 - Registry to place matters before Chief Justice for constitution of Bench of Larger Bench.

[Para ]

Cases Referred :-

Shyam Babu Verma v. Union of India, (1994) 2 SCC 521.

Sahib Ram v. State of Haryana, 1995 Supp (1) SCC 18.

Chandi Prasad Uniyal v. State of Uttarakhand, (2012) 8 SCC 417.

ORDER

SLP (C) No. 32555 of 2009, SLP (C) No. 16962 of 2011 and SLPs (C) Nos. 2575967 of 2012

1. Arguments heard, which remained inconclusive.

2. For further arguments, list these cases on 272-2014.

3. To be taken up as the first case.

4. In view of an apparent difference of views expressed on the one hand in Shyam Babu Verma v. Union of India, (1994) 2 SCC 521 and Sahib Ram v. State of Haryana, 1995 Supp (1) SCC 18 and on the other hand in Chandi Prasad Uniyal v. State of Uttarakhand, (2012) 8 SCC 417, we are of the view that the remaining special leave petitions should be placed before a Bench of three Judges. The Registry is accordingly directed to place the file of the remaining special leave petitions before the Hon'ble the Chief Justice of India for taking instructions for the constitution of a Bench of three Judges, to adjudicate upon the present controversy.

.