ORDER :

HEMANT GUPTA, J.

1. At the outset, it is stated that this order is being passed to address the preliminary objection raised by Mr. Shyam Divan, learned senior counsel for the State of Haryana, and by Mr. Ranjit Kumar for the Haryana Sikh Gurudwara Management Committee regarding maintainability of the present writ petitions.

2. The challenge in the writ petitions is to the Haryana Sikh Gurdwara (Management) Act, 2014, on the ground that it is violative of the Sikh Gurdwara Act, 1925, the State Reorganisation Act, 1956, the Punjab Reorganisation Act, 1966 as well as the InterState Corporation Act, 1957.

3. The maintainability of these writ petitions is questioned, primarily on two grounds, namely, (i) that there was no infringement of fundamental rights enabling the petitioners to invoke Article 32 of the Constitution of India; and (ii) that by arraying the States of Punjab and Himachal Pradesh as parties to the writ petitions, the writ petitioners are virtually inviting other States to comment upon the legislative competency of the State of Haryana, which is actually an abuse of the process of law.

4. Mr. Shyam Divan, learned senior counsel appearing for the State of Haryana relied upon Chiranjit Lal Chowdhuri vs. Union of India & Ors. AIR 1951 SC 41 , D.A.V. College , etc. etc. v. State of Punjab & Ors. (1971) 2 SCC 269 and Ramdas Athawale v. Union of India & Ors. (2010) 4 SCC 1, in support of his above contentions.

5. The petitioners belong to a religious minority in the State of Haryana, a fact which is not disputed by Mr. Divan. As a minority, the petitioners have a right to profess, practice and propagate religion as secured under Article 25 of the Constitution of India and in terms of Article 26 of the Constitution of India, such minority has a right to establish and maintain institutions for religious and charitable purposes; to manage its own affairs in matters of religion; to own and acquire movable and immovable property; and to administer such property in accordance with law. Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution of India read thus:

“25. Freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion.— (1) Subject to public order, morality and health and to the other provisions of this Part, all persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right freely to profess, practise and propagate religion.

(2) Nothing in this article shall affect the operation of any existing law or prevent the State from making any law—

(a) regulating or restricting any economic, financial, political or other secular activity which may be associated with religious practice;

(b) providing for social welfare and reform or the throwing open of Hindu religious institutions of a public character to all classes and sections of Hindus.

Explanation I.—The wearing and carrying of kirpans shall be deemed to be included in the profession of the Sikh religion.

Explanation II.—In subclause (b) of clause (2), the reference to Hindus shall be construed as including a reference to persons professing the Sikh, Jaina or Buddhist religion, and the reference to Hindu religious institutions shall be construed accordingly.

26. Freedom to manage religious affairs.— Subject to public order, morality and health, every religious denomination or any section thereof shall have the right—

(a) to establish and maintain institutions for religious and charitable purposes;

(b) to manage its own affairs in matters of religion;

(c) to own and acquire movable and immovable property; and

(d) to administer such property in accordance with law.”

6. The challenge in Chiranjit Lal