Baljeet Singh Saini & ORS v. State Of Haryana & ORS

VINOD KUMAR 2016.08.05 15:23 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh CWP No.8629 of 2016 [ 1 ] *****

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CWP No.8629 of 2016 Date of decision:04.08.2016 Baljeet Singh Saini and others

...Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana and others

...Respondents

CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain

Present:

Mr. C.R.Dahiya, Advocate, for the petitioners.

***** Rakesh Kumar Jain, J.

The petitioners have challenged the order/notice dated 18.04.2016 by which respondent No.6 is to finalize the list of 4,600 life members of the society. Vide order dated 01.12.2015, the Director General of Industries & Commerce-cum-Registrar General of Societies, Haryana, while upholding the order of the State Registrar dated 18.12.2014, directed the administrator of the society to invite fresh objections/applications/ additions to the voter list through two highly circulated leading daily newspapers in Hindi/Vernacular language with a rider that the schedule of the election should not be delayed beyond a period of three months. It is also directed that the administrator will prepare the bio metric identity cards of the members of the society linking with the original Aadhar Card and ensure that no false identity cards of the members are made. Pursuant to the said order, the ADC-cum-Administrator issued the public notice inviting application forms to finalize the life membership of the society as well as to make the bio metric cards of the life members. In the said notice, it is

VINOD KUMAR 2016.08.05 15:23 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh CWP No.8629 of 2016 [ 2 ] ***** mentioned that "those 4600 member of the society having bio-metric card need not to apply again".

The petitioners are aggrieved only against this part of the public notice exempting 4600 life members having bio metric cards from applying again.

Counsel for the petitioners has vehemently argued that Note (1) of the public notice is illegal, arbitrary and, thus, prayed that it may be set aside.

After hearing learned counsel for the petitioners and perusing the record, I am of the considered opinion that there is no illegality in the Note (1) of the public notice, under challenge, because the list of the members of the society is being prepared which is to be based upon the bio metric cards. Since 4600 life members of the society are already having bio metric cards, therefore, they have rightly been exempted from applying again.

Thus, there is hardly any reason to interfere in this petition and hence, the same is hereby dismissed.

The record of CWP No.23562 of 2015, which was ordered to be attached with this case vide order dated 26.07.2016, be detached and sent back to the record room.

August 04, 2016 (Rakesh Kumar Jain) vinod* Judge Whether speaking / reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No