Dalbir And ORS v. State Of Haryana And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.18395 of 2015 Date of Decision: September 02, 2015 Dalbir and others .....Petitioners versus The State of Haryana and others .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT.

HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASPAL SINGH.

Present: Mr.Jagdish Manchanda, Advocate, for the petitioners. Ms.Kirti Singh, Deputy AG, Haryana.

-.-

1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? --- Surya Kant, J. (Oral) Notice of motion.

On our asking, Ms.Kirti Singh, learned Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.

Let five copies of the writ petition be supplied to the State counsel during the course of day failing which this order shall be automatically recalled and the writ petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed for non-prosecution. In view of the nature of order which we propose to pass, it is not necessary to seek any counter-reply from the respondents at this stage.

The State Government vide Notification dated 30.04.2015 has established a new Gram Panchayat of village Rindhana Jisarthan Pana out of the existing Gram Panchayat of MOHINDER KUMAR 2015.09.03 11:49 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CWP No.18395 of 2015 [2] village Rindhana, Block Kathura, District Sonepat. The controversy has arisen after the order dated 05.05.2015 (P-2) followed by a Government Circular dated 07.05.2015 (P-3) regarding allocation of seats and completion of work of wardbandi of two Gram Panchayats. The petitioners have a long story to tell that neither the geographical contiguity nor equitable distribution of castes and communities has been kept in view while allocating them to different wards. The petitioners have raised the aforesaid issues vide representations dated 23.05.2015, 18.05.2015, 27.5.2015 and 17.06.2015 (P-4, P-5, P-6 & P-7, respectively).

Since the nature of controversy projected hereinabove can hardly be termed a legal issue warranting determination by this Court and is essentially an administrative exercise to be undertaken by the authorities, we dispose of this writ petition without expressing any view on merits, with a direction to respondent Nos.3 to 4 to take cognizance of the above-mentioned representations and decide the same by passing a speaking order as early as possible but well in advance before the Gram Panchayat elections.

Ordered accordingly.

Dasti.

[SURYA KANT] JUDGE September 02, 2015 [JASPAL SINGH] mohinder JUDGE MOHINDER KUMAR 2015.09.03 11:49 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh