Page 1 of 3

ITEM NO.53 COURT NO.11 SECTION X

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO(s). 398 OF 2010

RATAN N.TATA Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s)

(With appln(s) for intervention and interim directions)

With
I.A.No.3 (Appln.for impleadment)

Date: 13/12/2010 This Petition was called on for hearing today.

CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SINGHVI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASOK KUMAR GANGULY

For Petitioner(s) Mr.Harish N.Salve, Sr.Adv.

Mr.Sidharth Luthra, Sr.Adv.
Mr.Raian N.Karanjawala, Adv.
Mr.Prateek Jalan, Adv.
Ms.Ruby Singh Ahuja, Adv.
For M/S. Karanjawala & Co.,Adv.

For Respondent(s) Mr.G.E.Vahanvati, AG

Mrs.Indira Jaisingh, ASG
Mr.Devadat Kamat, Adv.
Mr.T.A.Khan, Adv.
Mr. B.V. Balaram Das,Adv.
Mr.S.N.Terdal, Adv.
Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma,Adv.

For Intervenor Mr.Shanti Bhushan, Sr.Adv.

Mr.Prashant Bhushan, Adv.
Mr.Pranav Sachdeva, Adv.

For Applicant in Mr.Jay Salva, Adv.

I.A.No.2/2010 Mr.Sumit Ghosh, Adv.
Mr.Mustafa Arif, Adv.

For Applicant in Mr.K.Subramaniam, Sr.Adv.

I.A.No.3/2010 Ms.Purnima Bhat Kak, Adv.
2

For RR No.5 Dr. Rajeev Dhavan, Sr.Adv.

Mrs. Vanita Bhargava, Adv.
Mr. Ajay Bhargava, Adv.
Mr. Nitin Mishra, Adv.
For M/s. Khaitan & Co., Adv.

For RR No.6 Mr. Anil Divan, Sr.Adv.

http://courtnic.nic.in/supremecourt/temp/wc%2039810p.txt 12/20/2010
 Page 2 of 3

Ms. Nisha B., Adv.

Ms. D.Hazarika, Adv.
Ms. Sumita Hazarika, Adv.

UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following

O R D E R

I.A. No.2 of 2010

This is an application by Dr. J.K.Jain, s/o late Mr. Lala Ilam

Chand Jain, r/o 6B/6, Siri Fort Institutional Area, New Delhi-110
049 for being allowed to intervene in the proceedings of the writ
petition. Learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner and
the learned Attorney General appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4
say that they do not have any objection.

In view of the above, Interlocutory Application No.2 is

allowed in terms of the prayer made.

I.A. No.3 of 2010

This is an application by Chennai Press Club, a registered

society under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975 for
permission to be impleaded as party respondent.

We have heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned

senior counsel for the petitioner and the learned Attorney General
and are convinced that the applicant is neither a necessary nor a
proper party for the purpose of deciding the issue raised in the
writ petition. Therefore, the prayer for impleadment is rejected.
However, we grant leave to the applicant to act as an intervenor in
the proceedings of the writ petition.
3

I.A. No..... of 2010 in WP(C)No.398/2010

This application has been presented in the Court on behalf of

Centre for Public Interest Litigation through its General Secretary
for permission to act as an intervenor in the proceeding of the
writ petition.

Learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner and the

learned Attorney General appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4 say
that they do not have any objection.

In view of the above, the Interlocutory Application is allowed

in terms of the prayer made.

Dr.Rajeev Dhavan and Shri Anil Divan, learned senior counsel

appearing for respondent Nos.5 and 6 respectively request that
their instructing counsel may be given some time to file counter

http://courtnic.nic.in/supremecourt/temp/wc%2039810p.txt 12/20/2010
 Page 3 of 3

affidavit.

Shri Harish N.Salve, learned senior counsel appearing for the

petitioner says that his instructing counsel will file a
supplementary affidavit and rejoinder to the counter of respondent
Nos.1 to 3 by first week of January, 2011.

Reply affidavits on behalf of respondent Nos.5 and 6 may be

filed within next three weeks.

List the case on 02.02.2011.

Learned Attorney General may produce in a sealed envelope copy

of the complaint referred to in para 6 of the counter affidavit.

( Satish K.Yadav ) ( Phoolan Wati Arora )

Court Master Court Master

http://courtnic.nic.in/supremecourt/temp/wc%2039810p.txt 12/20/2010