C.W.P NO. 11892 OF 2008 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P NO. 11892 OF 2008 DECIDED ON : 30.03.2009 Satbir Singh ...Petitioner versus State of Haryana and others ...Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT Present : Mr. Jagdish Manchanda, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. R. D. Sharma, Senior DAG, Haryana, for respondent No.1. Mr. Jagdeep Singh, Advocate, for respondents No.2 and 3. Mr. Ajay Bansal, Advocate, for respondent No.4. SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL) The petitioner seeks quashing of the notification dated 08.07.2008 (Annexure P-2), whereby he has been removed from the office of Chairman, Market Committee, Pataudi and one Ram Niwas Yadav has been appointed/nominated in his place. On 14.07.2008, a Division Bench of this Court passed the following order: “ By making reference to Section 16 of the Punjab Agricultural Produce Market Act, C.W.P NO. 11892 OF 2008 -2- 1961, counsel for the petitioner argues that the State Government has no power whatsoever to remove the petitioner from the post of Chairman, Market Committee, Pataudi. Notice of motion for 22.10.2008. Operation of order Annexure P-2 qua the petitioner, shall remain stayed till further orders”. During the pendency of this writ petition, another notification dated 14.11.2008 (Annexure R-2) has been issued in purported exercise of powers under Section 12 read with Section 16 of the Punjab Agricultural Produce Market Act, 1961. Vide this notification, besides re-appointing the said Ram Niwas Yadav as Chairman of the Market Committee, Pataudi, the Vice Chairman and other members have also been nominated/ appointed. The respondents have issued yet another notification dated 19.12.2008, whereby part of the previous notification dated 14.11.2008 to the extent of nomination of Ram Niwas Yadav firstly as member of the Market Committee and then as Chairman of the said Committee, has been withdrawn. Relying upon these notifications, it is urged on behalf of the respondents that the writ petition has been rendered infructuous. Learned counsel for the petitioner, on the other hand, contends that the impugned notification dated 08.07.2008 C.W.P NO. 11892 OF 2008 -3- whereby the petitioner was removed from the office of Chairman of Market Committee, Pataudi, has not been withdrawn so far. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the stand taken on behalf of the respondents that by virtue of the notification dated 14.11.2008, the earlier notification dated 08.07.2008 also stands withdrawn, I am of the considered view that the petitioner is entitled to the resultant declaration that he stands restored as Chairman, Market Committee, Pataudi. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with a direction to the respondents to allow the petitioner to continue as Chairman, Market Committee, Patuadi, untill he is removed from that office in accordance with the procedure prescribed under the Act. Disposed of. Let a copy of this order be given dasti on payment of usual charges. MARCH 30, 2009 (SURYA KANT) shalini JUDGE