1. The matter was listed at Sr.No.80 for hearing on 7.12.2012. On the said date, the application came to be adjourned to 17.1.2013. Learned advocate for the applicant had asked for early date. However, considering the load on the roster, it was not possible to fix any other / earlier date for hearing of the application. Accordingly, the hearing of the application was adjourned to 17.1.2013.
It appears that on 29.11.2012, respondent No.2 had filed a note in the Registry.
Learned advocate for respondent No.2 had not drawn Court s attention to the said note.
The said note has been filed by respondent No.2, wherein respondent No.2 has stated that the application should be heard on priority basis.
Now, in view of the office note dated 14.12.2012, the application is placed for orders today.
The next date of hearing of the matter has been fixed having regard to the daily cause-list and therefore, it is not possible to change the date of hearing and/or to grant any priority to any particular matter. Though learned advocate for respondent No.2 is appearing in the matter, the above-referred note has been filed by respondent No.2 and respondent No.2 insists for early hearing and also priority in hearing. Now, the office has placed such note for order though hearing is adjourned to 17.1.2013.
Under the circumstances and since respondent No.2 insists for early hearing by way of priority, office may place the matter before the Hon ble the Chief Justice for appropriate orders in light of the respondent s request so that alternative of placing the matter before another Court, for early hearing, may be considered.
(K.M.THAKER, J.) Bharat* Page 2 of 2