Rao Riaz Ahmad v. State Of Haryana Through Secretary, Administration Of Justice Department, Government Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 25.05.2026 Rao Riaz Ahmad .....Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Haryana Through Secretary, Administration Of Justice Department, Government of Haryana ..Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present :

Mr. Anshul Mangla, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Vikrant Pamboo, Addl. AG Haryana.

**** HARPREET SINGH BRAR , J. (Oral) 1.

The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, particularly in the nature of Mandamus directing respondent No.3Chairman, Haryana Waqf Tribunal to issue the "certificate of proceedings" to the petitioner, thereby enabling the petitioner to claim pay and allowances

in terms of Rule 4 of the Haryana State Waqf Tribunals (Terms and Conditions of Appointment of Members) Rules, 2016, in view of letters dated 05.05.2025 (Annexure P-5) and 29.08.2025 (Annexure P-6) issued by respondent No.2.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the petitioner was appointed as a Member of the Haryana Waqf Tribunal, Rohtak vide notification dated 17.07.2020 (Annexure P-1) for a period of three years and was subsequently granted extension upto 31.03.2025 vide letter dated 13.12.2024 (Annexure P-4). Although the Tribunal remained non-functional from 01.04.2024 to 27.11.2024, it became functional thereafter and the petitioner duly attended the proceedings and discharged functions from 28.11.2024 to 31.03.2025. It is the established practice of respondent No.3 to issue certificate of proceedings for enabling Members of the Tribunal to claim honorarium, DA and TA, and similar certificates had earlier been issued to the petitioner as well (Annexure P-3). The petitioner accordingly submitted invoices before respondent No.

2 for release of honorarium and other allowances, however, objections were raised vide letters dated 05.05.2025 (Annexure P-5) and 29.08.2025 (Annexure P-6) on the ground that the certificate of proceedings had not been furnished and that the Tribunal was non-functional during the relevant period.

representation dated 07.11.2025 (Annexure P-7), respondent No.3 has arbitrarily refused to issue the certificate on the pretext that there is no legal mandate for issuance of such certificate, thereby illegally depriving the petitioner of legitimate honorarium and allowances for the period during which the petitioner duly attended and performed functions before the Tribunal.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that he would be satisfied if the representation dated 07.11.2025 (Annexure P-7) of the petitioner is decided by the respondents by passing a speaking order in a time bound manner.

4.

Mr. Vikrant Pamboo, Addl. AG Haryana waives service of notice on behalf of the respondent and submits that he has no objection in case a direction is issued to the respondents for time-bound consideration and decision of the representation of the petitioner by passing a speaking order.

5.

Therefore, in view of the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, the respondent No.3 is directed to consider the representation dated 07.11.2025 (Annexure P-7) of the petitioner and pass a speaking order, after affording him an opportunity to be heard, within a

period of 08 weeks from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. Further, the decision taken thereof shall be conveyed to the petitioner. 6.

Needless to say, if the petitioner is found entitled to the relief sought, the same shall be granted forthwith by the respondents. 7.

Disposed of, accordingly.

(HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE 25.05.2026 parul verma Whether speaking/reasoned. : Yes/No Whether Reportable. :

Yes/No