Senior advocate Indira Jaising and advocate Vrinda Grover, also appearing for the petitioners, said in their cases also notices were published as directed by the top court.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Gujarat government and the Centre, said although the original remission order has been placed on record by the state, if the petitioners want to place it themselves, he has no problem with that.

"Your written submissions should focus on some main issues and arguments," the bench told the counsel for the petitioners and granted them three weeks to file their replies.

It also allowed the convicts to file their counter affidavits on the petitions challenging the remission.

On May 9, the top court had directed the publication of notices in local newspapers, including in Gujarati and English, against the convicts who could not be served notices, including the one whose house was found by the local police to be locked and his phone switched off.

The top court had on May 2 deferred the hearing after some of the counsel for the convicts raised objections about they not being served notices on the pleas challenging the remission granted to them.

The Centre and the Gujarat government had told the court they were not claiming any privilege and not filing any plea for a review of the court's March 27 order asking for production of the original records with regard to the remission granted to the convicts.

The Gujarat government had raised preliminary objections with regard to the petitions filed in the matter other than the one by Bilkis Bano, saying it will have wide ramifications as every now and then third parties will approach courts in criminal cases.

The top court had on April 18 questioned the Gujarat government over the remission granted to the 11 convicts, saying the gravity of the offence should have been considered before showing leniency, and wondered if there was any application of mind.

Asking for reasons for the premature release of the convicts, the top court had also questioned frequent parole granted to them during their incarceration.

"It (remission) is a kind of grace, which should be proportional to the crime," it had said.

The Centre and the Gujarat government had then told the court they might file a plea seeking a review of its March 27 order asking them to be ready with the original files on the grant of remission.

Terming Bilkis Bano's gang-rape and the murder of her family members during the 2002 post-Godhra riots a "horrendous" act, the supreme court had on March 27 asked the Gujarat government whether uniform standards, as followed in other murder cases, were applied while granting remission to the convicts.

It had sought the responses of the Centre, the Gujarat government and others on the plea filed by Bilkis Bano, who has challenged the remission of the sentences. All 11 convicts were granted remission by the Gujarat government and released on August 15 last year.

Besides Bilkis Bano's petition, several other PILs including one by CPI(M) leader Subhashini Ali, independent journalist Revati Laul, former vice-chancellor of Lucknow University Roop Rekha Verma have challenged the remission. Trinamool Congress (TMC) MP Mahua Moitra has also filed a PIL against the remission.