AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
7 paragraphs · 231 wordsRaj Mohan Singh, J
[1] Petitioner seeks issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent No.1 to decide the pending application for interim stay on some early actual date and also to stay operation of the impugned order dated 24.09.2019 passed by respondent No.2, suspending the petitioner from the post of Sarpanch till the decision of the pending appeal.
[2] Learned counsel states that the statutory appeal pending before respondent No.1 has to be decided and the subject matter of the litigation has to be preserved during pendency of the appeal.
[3] On the asking of this Court, Mr. Vikrant Pamboo, DAG, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State and states that every endeavour shall be made by respondent No. 1 to decide the application for interim stay on the next date of hearing before respondent No.1.
[4] At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner states that no date is fixed in the appeal and the application so far.
[5] In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate to direct respondent No.1 to decide the application within 10 days from today. In case there is some unavoidable circumstance in not deciding the application within the time prescribed, then there shall be stay of the operation of the impugned order during the pendency of the stay application.
[6]. Petition stands disposed of.