The Delhi Orthodox Diocesan Council (Regd.) v. State Of Haryana And ORS

CWP-7690-2020 (O&M) -12024:PHHC:054509

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CWP-7690-2020 (O&M) Date of Decision: April 23, 2024 The Delhi Orthodox Diocesan Council (Regd.) ......Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and others ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ

Present:

Mr.Kuriakose Varghese, Advocate for the petitioner (through VC) Ms.Upasana Dhawan, AAG, Haryana.

Mr.Sushant Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.3.

........

RAJESH BHARDWAJ, J.(ORAL) Petitioner has approached this Court praying for issuance or order/direction for quashing/setting aside impugned order bearing No.SPC/192, dated 23.05.2020, Annexure P-4, issued by respondent No.3, being illegal, arbitrary and null and void.

It is further prayed to stay operation of impugned order/notice, dated 23.05.2020, Annexure P-4, during pendency of the present petition.

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that respondent No.3/MC had issued impugned notice, dated 23.05.2020, Annexure P-4, during the lock down period, however, the petitioner duly filed its reply, dated 29.05.2020. The petitioner has assailed the impugned notice on the various grounds taken therein.

MEENU 2024.04.24 14:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-7690-2020 (O&M) -22024:PHHC:054509 However, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3/MC submits that though reply was filed by the petitioner, however, before any decision could be taken, the petitioner had approached this Court by way of present petition and was granted interim stay and hence no decision could be taken after filing of the reply by the petitioner. On hearing learned counsel for the parties, it is apparent that pursuant to the impugned notice, the petitioner had already filed its reply but there is no decision taken on the same due to pendency of the present petition. Hence, the present petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach respondent No.3/MC within ten days from today and on its appearance, respondent No.

3/MC would give it a personal hearing and decide the impugned notice by passing a speaking order expeditiously in accordance with law preferably within four weeks from the date of appearance of the petitioner. Petitioner is also at liberty to take all the grounds available to it while assailing the impugned notice issued to it. However, interim order, dated 02.06.2020, would remain in force till the decision of the notice by respondent No.3/MC. April 23, 2024 ( RAJESH BHARDWAJ ) meenuss JUDGE 1.

Whether speaking/reasoned ?

Yes/No 2.

Whether reportable ?

Yes/No MEENU 2024.04.24 14:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document