Vinod Dhiman v. State Of Haryana And ORS.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.19727 of 2015 Date of Decision: September 17, 2015 Vinod Dhiman .....Petitioner versus State of Haryana and others .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT.

HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASPAL SINGH.

Present: Mrs.Kiran Bala Jain, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Anil Mehta, DAG, 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 to respondent Nos.1 & 3 only at this stage.

On our asking, Mr.Anil Mehta, learned Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, accepts notice on their behalf. Let two 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 respondent Nos.1 & 3 or to serve respondent No.2 at this stage as no order prejudicial to his interest is being passed. The short grievance of the petitioner is that vacancy of Municipal Councilor from Ward No.4 reserved for women in the Municipal Corporation, Ambala, is lying vacant MOHINDER KUMAR 2015.09.30 12:48 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CWP No.19727 of 2015 [2] since January, 2014 as the elected Councilor Smt.Rama Rani resigned from that seat after joining the Government service. The petitioner thus contends that the election for the resultant vacancy deserves to be held within a reasonable time. The other Municipal Councilors are also said to have represented for holding the said election.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of relief sought in this writ petition, we dispose of the same with a direction to respondent Nos.1 & 3 to consider the aforementioned issue raised by the petitioner in accordance with law and take an appropriate decision as early as possible but not later than two months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order.

Ordered accordingly.

Dasti.

[SURYA KANT] JUDGE September 17, 2015 [JASPAL SINGH] mohinder JUDGE MOHINDER KUMAR 2015.09.30 12:48 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh