Mahaveer Sharma v. State Of Haryana Through Secretary Department Of Cooperation

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH **** Date of Decision: 05.05.2026 MAHAVEER SHARMA AND ANOTHER

...Petitioners

Vs.

STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

...Respondents

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present:- Mr. Harsh Manocha, Advocate for the petitioners Mr. Deepak Vashisht, DAG Haryana *** JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL) 1.

The petitioners through instant petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India are seeking setting aside of order dated 24.04.2026 whereby respondent No.4-District Registrar without granting them opportunity of hearing has removed their names from the voter list. They are further seeking setting aside of order dated 27.2.2025 whereby respondent No.5-Society has passed punitive order. They are also seeking direction to the respondents to:- i. include their name in the voter list;

ii. comply with instructions dated 23.05.2025; and iii. stay the elections scheduled to be held on 10.05.2026. They in alternative are seeking direction to respondents to decide their representations dated 24.04.2026 (Annexure P-16) and 26.04.2026 (Annexure P-17).

-22.

The petitioners are residents of District Gurugram. Respondent No.6 vide complaint dated 15.07.2022 filed before respondent No.4-District Registrar alleged embezzlement of funds on the part of petitioners. The petitioners submitted their reply dated 29.08.2022 and 04.10.2022. The respondent No.4 vide order dated 02.08.2024 disposed of the complaint with the observation that respondent No.6 has been elected as President, therefore, respondent No.5-Society may take necessary action. Respondent No.6, who was elected as President of respondent No.5-Society on 30.10.2022, vide order dated 27.02.2025 imposed a penalty of Rs.4 lakh upon the petitioners and debarred them from voting and contesting elections.

They filed petition under section 21 of Haryana Registration and Regulation of Societies Act, 2012 (for short '2012 Act') assailing order dated 27.02.2025 before respondent No.4District Registrar which was dismissed vide order dated 26.12.2025. They preferred appeal before respondent No.3-State Registrar which was disposed of vide order dated 17.04.2026 on the ground that their names find mentioned in the list of eligible voters dated 10.04.2026. The respondent No.4 vide order dated 24.04.2026 reviewed order dated 10.04.2026 and removed names of the petitioners from the list of eligible voters.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioners at the outset submits that District Registrar has again reviewed his order and included petitioners' names in the voter list. The petitioners apprehend that respondent may subsequently recall his order and delete their name from voter list.

-34.

In the wake of development of inclusion of petitioners' names in the voter list, the petition at this stage stands disposed of. To allay apprehension of the petitioners, it is hereby made clear that the respondent No.4-District Registrar shall not pass any adverse order against petitioners with respect to voter list without granting them opportunity of hearing.

5.

Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. (JAGMOHAN BANSAL) JUDGE May 05, 2026 Deepak DPA Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No