Vinod Kumar v. State Of Haryana And Others

CWP-4394-2025 (O&M) -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP-4394-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: 17.02.2025 Vinod Kumar ....Petitioner

Versus

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

Mr. Parminder Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

*** HARSH BUNGER, J. (Oral) The present petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India inter alia seeking a writ in the nature of Mandamus for directing the respondents to take action against respondents No.5 to 7 in terms of Section 51(3) of the Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1994. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that an eviction order dated 25.07.2024 (Annexure P-2) stands passed against the father of respondent No.5 namely Suresh Pal, husband of respondent No.6 namely Vishal Kumar and also against husband of respondent No.7 namely Raj Kishan.

2.1 It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that since respondents No.5 to 7 are residing in the property regarding which the eviction order has been passed, accordingly, in terms of the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of "Janabai vs. Additional Commissioner and others, S.L.P. (Civil) No. 24212 of 2017", HIMANI GUPTA 2025.02.19 10:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh

CWP-4394-2025 (O&M) -2appropriate action is required to be taken against respondents No.5 to 7. 3.

On advance service of copy of petition, Ms. Upasana Dhawan, AAG, Haryana, appears on behalf of the respondent-State. 4.

Learned State counsel on instructions from Mr. Mohinder Kumar, Patwari, Indri submits that appropriate proceedings have already been initiated against respondents No.5 to 7. She further informs the Court that the eviction order on the basis of which action is sought against respondents No.5 to 7; already stands challenged by way of an appeal before the Appellate Authority.

4.1 Learned State counsel further submits that the action initiated against respondents No.5 to 7 will be taken to its logical end within a period of six months, subject to any legal impediment or any other order passed by the higher authority.

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, keeping in view of the aforesaid submissions made by learned State counsel, prays that he may be permitted to withdraw the instant writ petition at this stage. 6.

Ordered accordingly.

7.

All the pending application(s), if any, shall also stand closed. 17.02.2025 (HARSH BUNGER) Himani JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No HIMANI GUPTA 2025.02.19 10:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh