Vijay Kumar And Others v. State Of Punjab And Others

CWP-15949-1999 (O&M) -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP-15949-1999 (O&M) Date of Decision: 20.09.2024 Vijay Kumar and others ....Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSH BUNGER Present :

None for the petitioners.

Ms. Vikas Suman Chaudhary, DAG, Punjab.

*** HARSH BUNGER, J. (Oral) 1.

The instant Writ Petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India inter alia seeking a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the notification dated 09.11.1999 (Annexure P-3). 2.

There is no representation on behalf of the petitioners. 3.

Learned State counsel submits that the prayer made in the instant Writ Petition is for quashing of notification dated 09.11.1999 (Annexure P-3) whereby, renumbering of various wards of Nagar Panchayat, Ajnala was done and the reservations made in respect of women and backward classes had been changed.

3.1 While referring to the notice of motion order dated 18.11.1999, it is pointed out that the prayer for interim stay of Annexure P-3 was declined although it was observed that the dispute would abate the outcome of the Writ Petition.

HIMANI GUPTA 2024.09.25 14:26 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh

CWP-15949-1999 (O&M) -23.2 Learned State counsel further pointed out that vide an order dated 31.05.2000, it was directed by Division Bench of this Court that the elections of Nagar Panchayat, Ajnala shall not be held, however, vide a subsequent order dated 22.02.2002, the aforesaid direction contained in order dated 31.05.2000 was vacated, the relevant extract of order dated 22.02.2002 reads as under:

"It has been pointed out on behalf of the respondents that the persons whose objections have been accepted have not been impleaded. No order to the prejudice of such persons can be passed in their absence.

Counsel prays that interim order dated May 31, 2000 by which the respondents were deprived from holding elections, be vacated.

It is not disputed that the persons who had filed objections have not been impleaded as parties. After hearing counsel for the parties, we vacate interim order dated May 31, 2000."

3.3 In view of the aforementioned facts and circumstances, learned State counsel submits that the matter has been rendered infructuous. 4.

Since there is no representation on behalf of the petitioners and considering the aforementioned facts, the present Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution.

5.

All pending application(s), if any, shall also stand closed. 20.09.2024 (HARSH BUNGER) Himani JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No HIMANI GUPTA 2024.09.25 14:26 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh