Sandeep Singh And ORS v. State Of Punjab And Others
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH 229(7) Decided on : 07.04.2025 SANDEEP SINGH AND OTHERS ..PETITIONERS
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS ...RESPONDENTS 229.1 RA-CW-5-2020 in CWP-19345-2012 (O&M) LOVEPREET SINGH AND ANOTHER ..PETITIONERS
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS ...RESPONDENTS 229.2 RA-CW-2-2020 in CWP-18736-2012 (O&M) SUKHJINDER SINGH AND OTHERS ..PETITIONERS
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS ...RESPONDENTS 229.3 RA-CW-4-2020 in CWP-19748-2014 (O&M) NAVNEET SINGH AND OTHERS ..PETITIONERS
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS ...RESPONDENTS 229.4 RA-CW-7-2020 in CWP-19262-2014 (O&M) NIKSON AND OTHERS ..PETITIONERS
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS ...RESPONDENTS
-2229.5 RA-CW-9-2020 in CWP-23043-2014 (O&M) PRABHJOT KAUR AND ANR ..PETITIONERS
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS ...RESPONDENTS 229.6 RA-CW-3-2020 in CWP-15160-2014 (O&M) KULWINDER SINGH AND OTHERS ..PETITIONERS
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS ...RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI PRESENT: Mr. D. S. Patwalia, Senior Advocate with Mr. Ayush Gupta, Advocate for the petitioners in RA-CW-7-2020 in CWP-19262-2014.
Mr. APS Tung, Advocate for the petitioners in RA-CWP-5-2020 in CWP-19345-2012. Mr. J. S. Pannu, Advocate for the petitioner in RA-CW-9-2020.
Mr. Malkiat Singh, DAG, Punjab.
Mr. Sanjeev Sharma, Advocate for the respondents No. 2 & 3.
Mr. Arushi Garg, Advocate for respondent No. 4.
**** HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI , J. (Oral) 1.
Present bunch of seven petitions the details of which mentioned
-3in the heading involve common point of law and common set of facts, hence, they are being dealt together.
2.
Replies filed on behalf of respondent No. 1 are taken on record, subject to all just exceptions.
3.
A bare perusal of the files reveals that a bunch of main writ petitions have been decided by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court while passing order dated 11.09.2019 (Annexure 2/2A). The review applications in the main writ petitions have been filed by the review applicants-respondents to contend that findings recorded in the order that the powers of the Punjab Mandi Board have been delegated by the Punjab Mandi Board to its Secretary, which is in violation of provision under Section 3(17) (ii) of the Punjab State Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1961. 4.
Learned counsel for the review-applicants in the review applications submits that by keeping the said question open with regard to delegation of the powers by the Punjab Mandi Board to its secretary as per the Section 3 (17) (ii) of the Punjab Agricultural Produce Market Act, 1961, the other findings recorded by the Co-ordinate Bench, will be implemented as directed.
5.
Learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that once, the termination of the services of the petitioners has been held to be bad on more than one account which order is not being reviewed so as to recall the said findings in the order, in case, the question as to whether powers were delegated to the secretary of the Punjab Mandi Board or not, can be kept open to be decided in another matter.
-46.
Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the present case by keeping the question open with regard to delegation of the powers by the Punjab Mandi Board to its secretary as per the Section 3 (17) (ii) of the Punjab Agricultural Produce Market Act, 1961, the respondentPunjab Mandi Board is directed to implement the order dated 11.09.2019 (Annexure 2/2A) passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the main writ petitions.
7.
The review applications have been disposed of in above terms. 8.
Pending civil miscellaneous application, if any, stands disposed of.
9.
A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of connected case.
(HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI) JUDGE 07.04.2025 Riya Whether speaking/reasoned:
Yes/No Whether Reportable:
Yes/No