Ved Parkash & ORS v. State Of Haryana & ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.21810 of 2015 Date of Decision: October 12, 2015 Ved Parkash and others ....Petitioners versus State of Haryana and others .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT.

HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.B.BAJANTHRI.

Present: Mr.Vikram Singh, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr.Anil Mehta, Dy. Advocate General, 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, Mr.Anil Mehta, learned Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.

Let three 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 petitioners are residents of village Faijalipur Majra, Tehsil Gharaunda, District Karnal. Their grievance is against delimitation exercise of wards of their village which, according to them, have been re-constituted arbitrarily and illegally without following the principles of continuity. Various MOHINDER KUMAR 2015.10.13 11:50 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CWP No.21810 of 2015 [2] instances have been given in the writ petition as to how the members of one family have been divided and put into different wards. Those instances find mentioned in para Nos.3 to 14 of the writ petition. It is further averred that these irregularities were immediately brought to the notice of the authorities vide application-cum-representations dated 17.08.2015, 25.08.2015 and 01.10.2015 (P-1 to P-3, respectively) but finding no response that the instant writ petition has been filed.

We have gone through the averments made in para Nos.3 to 14 of the writ petition. Though it is not expedient to express any views on merits but it appears that factual issues raised by the petitioners require attention of the authorities. We thus dispose of this writ petition with a direction to respondent Nos.2 & 3 to treat this writ petition as a comprehensive representation on behalf of the petitioners and take remedial steps as may be required as per law/Rules, before the Gram Panchayat elections are held. Let a copy of this order be given dasti to Mr.Anil Mehta, learned Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, for information and necessary compliance.

[SURYA KANT] JUDGE October 12, 2015 [P.B.BAJANTHRI] mohinder JUDGE MOHINDER KUMAR 2015.10.13 11:50 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh