The Court declined the petitioner's request for a change of Bench. The Court directed the Union of India and the State of Punjab to communicate a final view on the quo warranto petition regarding the Punjab Wakf Board CEO within one month and disposed of the petition.
Response to notice sought within one month; petition disposed of.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
I N THE HI GH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDI GARH
Civil Writ Petition No.3361 of 2014 (O&M) DATE OF DECI SI ON: 21.02.2014
Mohd. Sabir
…..Petitioner
versus
Union of India and others
.....Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTI CE SANJAY KI SHAN KAUL, CHI EF JUSTI CE HON’BLE MR. JUSTI CE ARUN PALLI
Present: Mr. J.S. Bhatti, Advocate for the petitioner
SANJAY KI SHAN KAUL, CHI EF JUSTI CE : (Oral)
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner requests for a change of Bench because a couple of days ago an adverse order was passed qua the counsel when he was appearing in person in a PIL. A counsel cannot choose his own Bench where he wants to appear.
Request declined.
The present PIL, as a quo warranto petition, has been filed qua the CEO of the Punjab Wakf Board arising from the amendment made in the Wakf Board and in the Punjab Wakf Act, 1995 to Section 23 which is stated to have come into effect on 20.9.2013. The petitioner is stated to have served a notice dated 30.10.2013 on the respondents to remove respondent No.5/ CEO. The State of Punjab is stated to have sought response from the Punjab Wakf Board on 6.12.2013 and 9.1.2014 and the allegation is that the Punjab Wakf Board is sitting over the matter.
We call upon the Union of India/ respondents No.1 and 2 through their Standing Counsel Ms. Anju Arora and the State of
Chand Parkash 2014.02.21 16:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CW P- 3361 - 2014
- 2 -
Punjab/ respondent No.3 through its Additional Advocate General Mr. Sukhdip Singh Brar (who are present in Court) to take a final view on the matter in response to the notices issued and com municate the decision to the petitioner within a period of one month from today.
Let complete set of the petition be supplied to learned counsels for the respondents.
The petition accordingly stands disposed of.
( SANJAY KI SHAN KAUL ) CHI EF JUSTI CE
21.02.2014 ( ARUN PALLI ) parkash* JUDGE
Chand Parkash 2014.02.21 16:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to allow the request for change of Bench based on alleged bias against petitioner's counsel.
Whether to direct the respondents to respond to the notice removing the CEO within one month.
Mohd. Sabir
Union of India
State of Punjab
Sanjay Ki Shan Kaul
Arun Palli
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
