Delhi High Court – Orders
Mohinder Singh & Anr vs Government Of Nct Of Delhi & Ors on 23 June, 2025
Author: Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora
Bench: Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora
$~9
* IN THEHIGH COURTOF DELHIAT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 8487/2025, CM APPL. 36878/2025 &CM APPL. 36879/2025
MOHINDER SINGH & ANR. .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. Viraj Datar, Sr. Adv. with Mr.
Tanmay Mehta, Ms. Anunya Mehta,
Mr. Naginder B, Mr. Ankit Siwach
and Mr. Udit Vaghela, Advs.
versus
GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Sameer Vashisht, SC, GNCTD
with Mr. Dhruv Rohatgi, Panel
Counsel, GNCTD, Advs. for R-1 and
2.
Mr. Jaspreet Singh Rai and Ms.
Avneet Kaur, Advs. for R-3.
Mr. Peeyoosh Kalra and Mr.
Yashwant Singh Baghel, Advs. for
R-4.
Mr. N. Hariharan, Sr. Adv. with Mr.
Gaurav Kr. Pandey and Ms. P Rekha
Angara, Advs. for R-5.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA
ORDER
% 23.06.2025
1. The present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, seeking quashing and setting aside of the Gazette
Notification dated 04.06.2025, whereby the co-option of the Petitioner Nos. 1
and 2 i.e., Mohinder Singh and Surinder Singh Dara, was withdrawn and
instead Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 i.e., Kashmir Singh and Malkeet Singh were
W.P.(C) 8487/2025 Page 1 of 6
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/06/2025 at 12:43:40
co-opted as members in Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Management Committee
(‘DSGMC’) i.e., Respondent No.3.
1.1. In addition, Petitioners also seeks quashing of the Gazette Notification
dated 12.06.2025, which schedules the meeting of the General Body of
Respondent No. 3 for 25.06.2025 for conducting the biennial elections to the
extent that it seeks to exclude/preclude the Petitioners from participating in
the said elections.
Arguments of the Petitioners
2. Learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioners states that the Gazette
Notification dated 04.06.2025 is ultra vires the Delhi Sikh Gurdwaras Act,
1971(‘Act of 1971’) and the Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Management Committee
(Co-option of Members) Rules of 1974 (‘Rules of 1974’).
2.1. He states that the Competent Authority had no jurisdiction to withdraw
the Gazette Notifications dated 26.10.2021 and 18.01.2022, whereby the
Petitioner No.1 and Petitioner No.2 were co-opted as members of DSGMC.
2.2. He states that in addition, no prior Show Cause Notice (‘SCN’)
granting an opportunity of hearing was issued to Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 prior
to the issuance of the impugned Gazette Notification dated 04.06.2025.
2.3. He states that W.P.(C) No. 11888/2021 and W.P.(C) No. 11910/2021
were filed by Respondent No. 4 and Respondent No. 5 respectively,
challenging the Petitioners’ co-option, which remained pending before this
Court. He states that in the Counter Affidavit filed by Respondent Nos. 1 and
2, in those writ petitions on 28.11.2021 and 10.12.2021 respectively,
Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 herein had opposed the claims of Respondent Nos. 4
and 5 and had reiterated that the co-option of Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 is legal
and valid.
W.P.(C) 8487/2025 Page 2 of 6
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/06/2025 at 12:43:40
2.4. He states that the W.P.(C) No. 11888/2021 and W.P.(C) No.
11910/2021 was withdrawn unconditionally by Respondent No. 4 and
Respondent No. 5 respectively on 06.03.2025 and therefore the challenge to
the co-option of the Petitioners came to an end.
2.5. He states that in these circumstances, the issuance of the Gazette
Notification dated 04.06.2025 and the subsequent Notification dated
12.06.2025, scheduling the biennial elections on 25.06.2025 is illegal and
void.
3. Issue notice.
Arguments of the Respondent Nos.1 and 2
4. Mr. Sameer Vashisht, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of
Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 states that the present writ petition is not
maintainable in view of an alternative efficacious remedy available to the
Petitioners to approach the District Judge for challenging the co-option of
Respondent Nos. 4 and 5under Section 31 of the Act of 1971.
4.1. He states that the Petitioners have suppressed from this Court an
additional affidavit dated 22.12.2023 filed by the Respondent Nos.1 and 2
herein in W.P.(C) No. 11910/2021 and W.P.(C) No. 11888/2021, wherein
Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 submitted before the learned Single Judge that the
co-option of Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 is invalid and instead Respondent Nos. 4
and 5 are entitled to be co-opted in place of Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2.
4.2. He states that the power of the Competent Authority to issue the
Gazette Notification dated 04.06.2025 can be traced under Section 21 of the
General Clauses Act, 1897 (‘Act of 1897’).
4.3. He states that it is a matter of record that no separate SCN was issued to
Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 before issuing Gazette Notification dated 04.06.2025;
W.P.(C) 8487/2025 Page 3 of 6
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/06/2025 at 12:43:40
however, he states that Petitioners had due notice about the decision of
Respondent Nos. 1 and 2, in view of the contents of the affidavit dated
22.12.2023 filed in W.P.(C) No. 11910/2021 and W.P.(C) No. 11888/2021.
Arguments of the Respondent No.5
5. Mr. N. Hariharan, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of
Respondent No. 5 states that since the co-option of Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2
was illegal, void ab initio, he states that the alleged non-compliance of
principles of natural justice would have no effect on the legality of the Gazette
Notification dated 04.06.2025.
5.1. He states that the plenary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of
the Constitution of India ought not to be exercised in view of the availability
alternative efficacious remedy and in this regards he relies upon the judgment
of the Division Bench in LPA No. 448/2024 titled Kawaljeet Singh v. Guru
Nanak Institute of Management and Technology and Ors.1
Arguments of the Respondent No.4
6. Mr. Kalra, learned Counsel for Respondent No. 4 as well submits that
the petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not maintainable
in view of the availability alternative efficacious remedy and relies upon the
judgment of Supreme Court in Shekhar Ghosh v. Union of India2, Union of
India v. Narender Singh3 andKusheshwar Prasad v. State of Bihar4.
Arguments of the Respondent No.3
1
2025:DHC:1673-DB.
2
2007 (1) SCC 331.
3
2008 (2) SCC 750.
4
2007 (11) SCC 447.
W.P.(C) 8487/2025 Page 4 of 6
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/06/2025 at 12:43:40
7. Mr. Jaspreet Singh Rai, learned counsel states that the registered Singh
Sabhas are a necessary party and this petition cannot be entertained in the
absence of the said parties.
8. At this stage, Mr. Vashisht, learned Standing Counsel of Respondent
Nos. 1 and 2 states that in the event this Court is inclined to grant any interim
stay in favour of the Petitioners qua the Gazette Notification dated
04.06.2025, then in that scenario Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 may be permitted
to cast their votes and their votes can be kept in sealed cover. He states
however, the election process which has commenced vide Notification dated
12.06.2025 may not be interdicted.
9. At this stage, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioners
states that so also the Petitioners may be permitted to cast their vote in the
upcoming election to be held on 25.06.2025 and their votes be similarly kept
in the sealed cover.
Directions
10. This Court has heard the learned Counsel for the parties and perused
the records.
11. In the facts of this case, there is no dispute that no separate SCN has
been issued to the Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 before issuance of the Gazette
Notification dated 04.06.2025. Prima facie, in the considered opinion of this
Court, the additional affidavit dated 22.12.2023 filed by Respondent Nos. 1
and 2 in W.P.(C) No. 11888/2021 and WP(C) 11910/2021 cannot substitute
as a SCN to the Petitioners.
12. Moreover, on a perusal of Section 39 of the Act of 1971 which was
earlier referred to by learned standing counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 and
2 and corresponding Rules of 1974, this Court is unable to read into the said
W.P.(C) 8487/2025 Page 5 of 6
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/06/2025 at 12:43:40
provisions the power of the Competent Authority to issue the Gazette
Notification dated 04.06.2025 in supersession of the Gazette Notifications
dated 26.10.2021 and 18.01.2022.
13. The counsels appearing for the parties jointly state that the suggestions
made by learned counsel for the Petitioners and learned counsel for
Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 for the interim measure, is agreeable to all the
parties.
14. Accordingly, with the consent of all the parties, it is directed that
Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 will cast their votes at the upcoming biennial
elections of Respondent No. 3 and their votes will be kept in a sealed cover.
So also, the Petitioners Nos. 1 and 2 will cast their votes at the upcoming
elections and their votes will be kept in a sealed cover.
15. Respondent Nos. 1 to 5 are directed to file their counter affidavit within
ten (10) days.
16. Rejoinder, if any, be filed before the next date of hearing.
17. List before the Roster Bench on 08.07.2025.
18. The digitally signed copy of this order, duly uploaded on the official
website of the Delhi High Court, www.delhihighcourt.nic.in, shall be treated
as a certified copy of the order for the purpose of ensuring compliance. No
physical copy of order shall be insisted by any authority/entity or litigant.
MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA
(VACATION JUDGE)
RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA
(VACATION JUDGE)
JUNE 23, 2025/gunn/sk
W.P.(C) 8487/2025 Page 6 of 6
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/06/2025 at 12:43:40