[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Punjab-Haryana High Court
Pritpal Singh And Others vs State Of Punjab And Others on 23 April, 2026
Author: Harsimran Singh Sethi
Bench: Harsimran Singh Sethi
132 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CWP-12558
12558-2026 (O&M)
Date of Decision : 23.04.2026
Pritpal Singh and others ........Petitioners
VERSUS
State of Punjab and others ........Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MANCHANDA
Present: Mr. Brij Mohan Vinayak, Advocate and
Mr. Kunal Vinayak, Advocate for the petitioner.
***
HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI, J. (Oral)
1. In the present petition, challenge is to the ord
orders/notices
ers/notices dated
27.03.2026 (Annexure P-3)
P 3) issued to the petitioner
petitioners in pursuance to the
Notification issued by the Government of Punjab dated 15.12.2025
(Annexure P-1),
P , whereby they have been restrained from carrying on their
vocation on the ground that the same is contrar
contrary to the
he directions envisaged
in the Notification dated 15.12.2025 (Annexure P
P-1).
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a perusal of the
said Notification dated 15.12.2025 (Anne
(Annexure P-1) would show that,, till the
Administrative
dministrative Secretaries
ecretaries of the Department concerned issue
issues prohibitory
orders prohibiting
prohibit ng selling of certain items
items, the
he same cannot be implemented,
which was the stand of the respondent
respondent-State
State before this Court in CWP
No.5827 of 2026 titled "Ranjit
Ranjit Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and
ors.",, decided on 25.02.2026.
CWP-12558-2026 (O&M) -2-
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that while accepting
the said statement of the respondent-State, the writ petition was disposed of
as being premature whereas, in present case without issuance of any
prohibitory orders by competent authority as mentioned hereinabove, notices
have been issued to the petitioner by the Municipal Corporation, Amritsar
putting a bar on them to sell their products and their shops have been sealed
by treated the same contrary to the Notification dated 15.12.2025 (Annexure
P-1).
4. Notice of motion.
5. Mr. Jastej Singh, Additional A.G., Punjab accepts notice on
behalf of the respondent-State.
6. At the outset, learned counsel for the respondent-State submits
that in case, no prohibitory Notification has been issued so far by competent
authority, not only the notices issued to the petitioners will be withdrawn
and the shops in case sealed, will be opened by 10 a.m tomorrow i.e.
24.04.2026 but also they will not be harassed any further while continuing
their vocations till any such notification/prohibitory order is issued by the
competent authority and in case, any such prohibitory order is issued, the
same will be brought to the notice of the petitioner that the action so taken is
in consonance with the Notification dated 15.12.2025 (Annexure P-1)
coupled with the prohibitory order so passed.
7. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that in case, any of
the petitioners brings to the notice of the Commissioner Police, Amritsar or
Deputy Commissioner with regard to the harassment of continuing their
vocations any authority despite non-issuance of the prohibitory order in
terms of Notification dated 15.12.2025, appropriate action will be taken.
CWP-12558-2026 (O&M) -3-
8. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that keeping in view
the statement of the learned State counsel, the present petition is disposed of
as having been not pressed any further with liberty to challenge such actions
including the Notification dated 15.12.2025 (Annexure P-1) issued by the
Government of Punjab as well as any such prohibitory order passed for
implementation of Notification dated 15.12.2025 (Annexure P-1) so issued
in case, the grievance of the petitioners still persists.
9. Ordered accordingly.
(HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI)
JUDGE
23-04-2026 (DEEPAK MANCHANDA)
Sapna Goyal
JUDGE
NOTE: Whether speaking/ reasoned: YES
Whether reportable: NO
