Kuldeep Singh v. State Of Punjab And Other

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Decided on : 05.09.2025 KULDEEP SINGH . .Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHER . . . Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA PRESENT: Mr. Manish Kumar Singla, Advocate for the applicant.

Mr. Rahul Rampal, Additional Advocate General, Punjab. **** HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI , J. (Oral) RA-CW-549-2024 Present review application has been filed for recalling the order dated 14.10.2024 by which, the present writ petition was dismissed. The present review application has been filed alleging that the review applicant was not allowed to file the nomination paper and hence, keeping in view the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in SLP (C) NO. 25527 of 2024 titled as Sunita Rani and others versus State of Punjab and others, decided on 18.11.2024, the applicant-petitioner has a right to file the review application which needs to be considered on merit.

Notice of the application has already been issued by the Coordinate Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 20.12.2024. Learned counsel for the respondent-State raises no objection in case, the prayer made in the present application is allowed.

-2Keeping in view the averments made in the application, which are duly supported by an affidavit, the same is allowed. Consequently, the order dated 14.10.2024 is recalled and the writ petition is restored to its original number and status and the main writ petition is taken up for hearing today itself. CWP-26702-2024 1.

After arguing for some time, faced with the situation that the disputed question of fact has arisen as to whether the petitioner was restrained from filing the nomination paper or the nomination filed by the petitioner has been torned by the opponent of the petitioner, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner be given opportunity to file a representation before the authorities concerned i.e. respondent No. 5- District Electoral Officer-cum-Deputy Commissioner, Patiala, District Patiala for redressal of his grievance and the petitioner will be satisfied, at this stage, in case a direction is issued to the respondents to decide the claim of the petitioner by passing an appropriate speaking order in a time bound manner. 2.

Learned counsel for the respondents-State submits that in case, the petitioner files any such representation with the authority concerned i.e. respondent No. 5- District Electoral Officer-cum-Deputy Commissioner, Patiala, District Patiala, the same will be considered and an appropriate speaking order will be passed by the authority concerned within a period of two months from the date of receipt of such representation. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that keeping in view the statement of learned State counsel recorded herein above, the present petition may kindly be disposed of having been not pressed any further with

-3liberty to file a representation with respondent No. 5 as stated herein before. 4.

Ordered accordingly.

5.

Pending civil miscellaneous application, if any, stands disposed of.

(HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI) JUDGE ( SUDEEPTI SHARMA ) JUDGE 05.09.2025 Riya Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No