CWP-25283-2017 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Serial No.210 CWP-25283-2017 Decided on:14.07.2026 Prateek Lall and others . . . Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and others . . . Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA Present: Mr. Abhimanyu Singh, Advocate and Mr. Parveen Kumar, Advocate for petitioners no.1, 3, 6, 8, 9, 11 and 13 to 15. None for remaining petitioners. Ms. Ruchi Sekhri, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Mr. Rupinder Singh Khosla, Senior Advocate with Mr. Yogender Verma, Advocate for respondents no.5 and 9. Mr. Premjit Singh Hundal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Jasjeet Singh Brar Advocate for respondents no.10 and11. TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA, J.(ORAL) The petition has been filed inter alia seeking a writ of mandamus directing respondents no.6 to 8 to protect the petitioners’ life and liberty which is in danger at the hands of respondent no.5/Cooperative House Building Society and respondents no.9 to 11/office bearers of the society. 2. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners does not press his first prayer as danger to the petitioners’ life and liberty no longer subsists. 3. Further, a prayer has been made seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents no.2, 3 and 5 to shift the area earmarked as MEHAK HURIA 2026.07.17 18:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment CWP-25283-2017 -2- ‘religious building’ under the approved site plan of the Society, as the same is not as per minimum specifications/requirement of 0.20 acres. Also, a direction has been sought to respondents no.2 to 8 to remove the illegal installation/construction of a Gurdwara on the site in question. 4. Learned State counsel contended that approval for the religious building at the site under the sanctioned plan of the Society has already been withdrawn vide order dated 16.05.2017 passed by respondent no.2/Director, Town and Country Planning, Annexure R-5. 5. Learned counsel for respondents no.5 and 9 submits that the alleged construction of Gurdwara was being undertaken by Gurdwara Guru Nanak Dev Singh Sabha, Yamuna Enclave, Panipat ( for short, ‘Sabha’), as apparent from the letter dated 18.11.2017 in the connected petition, COCP- 2365-2018. But the Sabha has not been impleaded as a party to the petition. 6. Heard. 7. Considering the facts aforementioned, it is apparent that the approval for religious building in the Society has already been withdrawn vide order dated 16.05.2017. Further, the prayer to direct removal of illegal construction of the Gurdwara cannot be entertained in the absence of the Sabha, which has statedly started the construction, being a party to the petition. 8. In view thereof, the petition stands disposed of. (TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA) 14.07.2026 JUDGE Mehak Whether reasoned/speaking? Yes/No Whether reportable? Yes/No MEHAK HURIA 2026.07.17 18:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment