Minakshi And Another v. State Of Haryana And Others
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH CWP-20475-2025 Date of Decision :05.08.2025 Minakshi and another
...Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA
Present:
Ms. Shruti Jain Goyal, Advocate, Mr. Kanwal Goyal, Advocate, Mr. Paramjit Singh, Advocate and Ms. Sheena Dahiya, Advocate for the petitioners. Ms. Tanushree Gupta, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Haryana. TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA, J. (ORAL) The petition has been filed inter alia seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to decide the demand notices dated 24.03.2025, Annexure P-25 and 20.02.2025, Annexure P-26 and thereafter grant the appropriate relief immediately.
2.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that grievance raised herein is pending for appropriate decision before the respondents. At this stage, the petitioners will be satisfied in case third respondent is directed to decide their pending legal notices, dated 24.03.2025, Annexure P-25 and 20.02.2025, Annexure P-26, in a specified period.
3.
Notice of motion.
4.
Learned State counsel, accepts notice on behalf of the respondentsState and submits that the pending legal notices, dated 24.03.2025, and 20.02.2025, will be decided by the third respondent/Director, Elementary PUSHPINDER SAINI 2025.08.06 10:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CWP-20475-2025 -2Education, by passing a speaking order in accordance with law within three months.
5.
In view of the statement made, learned counsel for the petitioners has no objection to the petition being disposed of in terms thereof. 6.
Ordered accordingly.
7.
In case the order is not passed within the stipulated period, the officer concerned shall pay costs of 50,000 to the petitioners. (TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA) August 05, 2025 JUDGE ps Whether speaking/ reasoned :
Yes/No Whether reportable :
Yes/No PUSHPINDER SAINI 2025.08.06 10:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document