CWP No.21989 of 2010.doc - 1 – HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.21989 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: 13.12.2010 **** Pritam Singh Sarih . . . . Petitioner VS. Registrar of Firms & Societies Punjab & Ors. . . . . . Respondents **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT **** 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? **** Present: Mr. Ranjit Saini, Advocate for the petitioner ***** SURYA KANT J. (ORAL) (1). Notice of motion. On the asking of the Court, Mr. HS Brar, learned Additional Advocate General, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. Having regard to the nature of order which I propose to pass, there is no necessity to call upon the respondents to file the counter reply/affidavit at this stage. (2). The petitioner is aggrieved by the inclusion of respondents No.3 to 9 amongst the valid voters for the election of College Council, Nakodar. (3). Since the objections submitted by the petitioner have not been dealt with by the respondents while CWP No.21989 of 2010.doc - 2 – passing the impugned order(s) dated 24.11.2010 (Annexure P7 to P9), the writ petition is disposed of in terms of the undertaking given by the first respondent, who is present in the Court, to the effect that the objection(s) submitted by the petitioner shall be considered afresh and disposed of by passing a speaking order within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order (4). It is, however, directed that meanwhile, the election may be held as per the notified schedule but subject to the final outcome of the legal proceedings. (5). Disposed of accordingly. Dasti. 13.12.2010 vishal shonkar (SURYA KANT) JUDGE