CWP-29787-2026 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH *** CWP-29787-2026 Date of decision : 11.09.2026 M/s SR Institute of Advanced Ayurvedic Sciences Private Limited and others ... Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and others ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE DIVYA SHARMA Present: Mr.Puneet Bali, Senior Advocate with Mr. Aditya Ganju, Advocate, Mr. Ankur Sangal, Advocate, Mr. Vipul Joshi, Advocate, Mr.Srijan Garg, Advocate and Mr. Gagandeep Singh, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr.Deepak Bhardwaj, Addl. A. G. Haryana and Mr.Karan Jindal, DAG, Haryana for the respondents. VIKAS BAHL, J.(ORAL) 1. In the present writ petition, following prayers have been made:- “1st Civil Writ Petition under Article 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950, for issuance of a writ of mandamus, certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, declaring Section 3B and Section 10 (2) and (3) of The Haryana Development and Regulation of Urban Areas Act, 1975 ("Impugned Provisions") as being violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21, and consequently void and unenforceable. DAVINDER KUMAR 2026.09.11 17:58 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order / judgment CWP-29787-2026 2 It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may issue a Writ in the nature of Certiorari, or any other such or similar Writ or direction, quashing the Order bearing Memo No. 13357 dated 02.08.2023 (ANNEXURE P-1) passed by the Respondent No. 5, i.e., the District Town Planner (Enforcement), Gurugram ("Impugned Order"). It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may issue a Writ in the nature of Certiorari, or any other such or similar Writ or direction, quashing the impugned Show Cause Notice bearing Memo No. 12373 dated 25.07.2023 (ANNEXURE P-2) as well, the same being the very genesis of the aforesaid impugned Order dated 02.08.2023, in the given facts and circumstances. It is also prayed that this Hon'ble Court may issue a Writ in the nature of Mandamus, or any other such or similar Writ or direction, restraining the Respondents, their officers, servants and agents, from taking any coercive action, including sealing and/or demolition, in respect of the property bearing Plot No. B-92, Sushant Lok-I, Gurugram, invoking any alleged powers under the impugned provisions, and that the operation of the aforesaid impugned Order dated 02.08.2023 (ANNEXURE P-1) and the impugned Show Cause Notice dated 25.07.2023 (ANNEXURE P-2), may kindly be ordered to remain 'stayed' during the pendency of the present Petition. Lastly, it is prayed that any other such or similar Writ, order or direction, that this Hon'ble Court may deem fit to pass in the given facts and circumstances, may also kindly be passed in favour of the Petitioners.” 2. Learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that the DAVINDER KUMAR 2026.09.11 17:58 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order / judgment CWP-29787-2026 3 respondents have passed an order dated 22.08.2026 under Section 10(2) of the Haryana Development and Regulation of Urban Areas Act, 1975 (hereinafter to be referred to as “1975 Act”) and has submitted that a copy of the same would be handed over to the counsel for the petitioners during the course of the day. 3. Learned senior counsel for the petitioners has submitted that in view of the same, the petitioners would not press the challenge to the provision of Section 3 B and Section 10(2) and (3) of the 1975 Act and has submitted that since the impugned order is appealable, thus, he be permitted to withdraw the present writ petition with liberty to file an appeal under Section 19 of the 1975 Act against the order dated 22.08.2026 and order dated 02.08.2023. It is further submitted that the petitioners would file an appeal within a period of one week from today and has prayed that in case the said appeal is filed within the said period, the appellate authority be directed to decide the same on merits and not to dismiss the same solely on the ground of limitation. Learned senior counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the family of the petitioners is living in premises in question and is only carrying out the consultancy work with respect to Ayurvedic medicines on the 4th floor and as per the notification dated 06.02.2008 issued by the Haryana Government and also the policy dated 09.04.2022 as per the understanding of the petitioners, they have been permitted to carry out the said activity. It is fairly submitted that in case the appellate authority finds that the activity carried out by the petitioners is not permissible, then, DAVINDER KUMAR 2026.09.11 17:58 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order / judgment CWP-29787-2026 4 they undertake not to carry out the said activity also. It is further submitted that till the time the appeal is filed, the status quo with respect to premises in question be maintained. 4. Learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that the petitioners be directed to file an affidavit to the said effect along with the appeal as in case the appeal is not accepted, they would be bound by the said undertaking. 5. Keeping in view the above said facts and circumstances and the fair stand taken on behalf of the petitioners and the respondents, the petitioners are permitted to withdraw the present writ petition with the following observations / directions:- i) It would be open to the petitioners to file an appeal against the order dated 22.08.2026 as well as order dated 02.08.2023 within a period of one week from today. In case the said appeal is filed within the aforesaid one week, the appellate authority is directed to decide the same on merits and not to dismiss solely on the ground of limitation. ii) It would be open to the petitioners to raise all pleas before the appellate authority but along with the said appeal, petitioners no.2 and 3 would also file an affidavit on behalf of all the petitioners to the effect that in case the appellate authority is of the opinion that the activity being carried out by the petitioners is not permissible, then, the petitioners would DAVINDER KUMAR 2026.09.11 17:58 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order / judgment CWP-29787-2026 5 not carry out the said activity. iii) For a period of seven days, the status quo with respect to premises in question be maintained. The grant of status quo order should not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. It would be open to the petitioners to pray for extension of said status quo order before the appellate authority. (VIKAS BAHL) JUDGE (DIVYA SHARMA) JUDGE September 11, 2026. Davinder Kumar Whether speaking / reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No DAVINDER KUMAR 2026.09.11 17:58 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order / judgment