Rajeev Sethi vs Archaeological Survey of India

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2004 Supreme(SC) 1794

V. N. KHARE, A. R. LAKSHMANAN, S. H. KAPADIA
Rajeev Sethi – Appellant
Versus
Archaeological Survey of India – Respondent

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Amicus Curiae :- Mr. Harish N. Salve, Sr. Advocate.
For the Petitioners:- Mr. Akhil Sibal, Adv., Ms. Bina Madhavan, Ms. Pooja Nanekar and Mr. S.U.K. Sagar, Advs. for M/s. Lawyers Knit & Co.
For the Respondents:- Mr. Soli J. Sorabjee, Attorney General, Mr. Kirit N. Raval, Solicitor General Mr. Annam D. N. Rao, Advocate.

ORDER :

V.N. Khare, CJI.

We have heard the learned Attorney General and the learned Amicus Curiae.

2. We may clarify that our oral order for maintaining status quo would not prevent the authorities from removing encroachments in and around the Red Fort in accordance with law.

3. List on 15th March, 2004 as first item.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

2004 Supreme(SC) 1794

V. N. KHARE, A. R. LAKSHMANAN, S. H. KAPADIARajeev Sethi – AppellantVersusArchaeological Survey of India – Respondent

V. N. KHARE, A. R. LAKSHMANAN, S. H. KAPADIA
Rajeev Sethi – Appellant
Versus
Archaeological Survey of India – Respondent