Sanjay Kumar v. State Of Haryana

CWP-33239-2025 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (127) CWP-33239-2025 Date of decision:- 15.12.2025 Sanjay Kumar and another ... Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana and others ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL Present:- Mr. Saurav Verma, Advocate and Ms. Preeti Grover, Advocate for the petitioners.

**** SUVIR SEHGAL, J. (ORAL) 1.

This petition has been filed, inter alia, for issuance of a writ, in the nature of mandamus, directing the official respondents to grant recognition to Electropathy/Electro Homeopathy System of Medicine within the State of Haryana. Petitioners have also sought a direction to the official respondents to formulate and notify a comprehensive regulatory mechanism for practice as well as education after due consideration of the decision taken by the Government of India on 05.05.2010, Annexure P-2, as well as order dated 22.01.2015, Annexure P-3, passed by the Apex Court and provisions of The Rajasthan Electropathy System of Medicine Act, 2018, Annexure P-8. 2.

Counsel for the petitioners states that during the pendency of the present petition, petitioners have moved a comprehensive representation dated 11.11.2025, Annexure P-16, addressed to the Health Secretary, Government of Haryana. He submits that along with representation, petitioners have KAMAL SHARMA 2025.12.16 16:53 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.

High Court, Sector-1, Chandigarh.

CWP-33239-2025 -2appended the decision of the Government of India, Hon'ble Supreme Court as well as other material and have made a request for the recognition of Electropathy/Electro Homeopathy in the State. At this stage, counsel submits that a direction be issued to the respondents to consider the representation. 3.

Advance copy of the petition has been served upon the official respondents No.1 and 2.

4.

Mr. Ravish Kaushik, Additional Advocate General, Haryana puts in appearance on behalf of their behalf. He does not have any instructions regarding the representation, Annexure P-16.

5.

Given the nature of order proposed to be passed, this Court does not deem it necessary to call for a response from the respondents. 6.

Perusal of the averments made by the petitioners show that a representation dated 11.11.2025, Annexure P-16, has been submitted and is pending before respondent No.2.

7.

In view thereof, without commenting upon the material relied upon by petitioners, writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 to examine the representation, Annexure P-16, and take an appropriate decision thereon, keeping in view the material appended with the representation, within a period of four months from the date of communication of a copy of this order.

15.12.2025 (SUVIR SEHGAL) Kamal JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No KAMAL SHARMA 2025.12.16 16:53 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.

High Court, Sector-1, Chandigarh.