Heard the learned counsel for the parties. We find that the litigation has been spread over in four States, namely, Madras, Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka and Bombay. That would cause considerable hardship to the parties who would be required to visit different places where the litigation presently stands lodged. It is, therefore, desirable for the convenience of the parties also that the litigation should be in one court. On an earlier occasion in SLP (C) No. 2986 of 1993 this Court had passed an order transferring the matters therein to a Division Bench of the Madras High Court. As the original jurisdiction is with the Madras High Court, it would be desirable to have all the matters transferred to the Madras High Court so that the Court can take a comprehensive view of the nature of disputes between the parties. Mr Bobde, however, states that the writ petition filed in the Andhra Pradesh High Court may not be delayed on that account. We would permit his client to make a mention about the matter to the learned Chief Justice of the Madras High Court for early hearing. We, therefore, direct that Writ Petition No. 18407 of 1993 (Jugal Kishore Vyas v. Union of India) pending in the Andhra Pradesh High Court and Writ Petition No. 1498 of 1994 (D. Satyam v. Union of India) pending in the Karnataka High Court shall stand transferred to the High Court at Madras. In regard to Writ Petition No. 18407 of 1993, as stated above, the petitioner will be at liberty to move the learned Chief Justice for assigning the matter to the Division Bench for early hearing and such other orders as may be necessary. Similarly, the Writ Petition No. 1498 of 1994 pending in the Karnataka High Court shall stand transferred to the High Court at Madras to be heard by a Division Bench. The transfer petitions will stand disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs.