IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

108 (I) CWP-6-2025 Date of Decision : April 28, 2025 BHAGAT SINGH -PETITIONER V/S STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS -RESPONDENTS (II) CWP-1273-2025 AJAY KUMAR -PETITIONER V/S STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS -RESPONDENTS (III) CWP-252-2025 JAIDEEP -PETITIONER V/S STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS -RESPONDENTS (IV) CWP-472-2025 AAKASH AND ANOTHER -PETITIONERS V/S STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS -RESPONDENTS (V) CWP-658-2025 NEER AHLAWAT -PETITIONER V/S STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS -RESPONDENTS (VI) CWP-438-2025 DEVINDER YADAV 2025.05.30 12:31 DINESH KUMAR -PETITIONER V/S STATE OF HARYANA, -RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE (VII) CWP-1100-2025 DARSHAN KUMAR -PETITIONER V/S STATE OF HARYANA, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE -RESPONDENT (VIII)CWP-1964-2025 SUSHIL KUMAR AND ANOTHER -PETITIONERS V/S STATE OF HARYANA, -RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE (IX) CWP-3001-2025 YASHPAL SINGH DAHIYA -PETITIONER V/S STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS -RESPONDENTS (X) CWP-3530-2025 SANDEEP VERMA -PETITIONER V/S STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS -RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI Present: Mr. Mukul Khatri, Advocate for the petitioner(s) (in CWP-1273-2025, CWP-472-2025 and CWP-3530-2025).

DEVINDER YADAV 2025.05.30 12:31 Mr. Jatinder Pal Singh, Advocate for Mr. Sachin Jain, Advocate for the petitioner (in CWP-3001-2025).

Mr. Ketan Antil, Advocate for the petitioner(s) (in remaining writ petitions).

Mr. Bhupender Singh, D.A.G., Haryana.

Mr. Rishabh Gupta, Advocate for the respondent No.4- Bar Council of Punjab & Haryana.

***

KULDEEP TIWARI, J. (ORAL)

1. The petitioners, in all these writ petitions, are Advocates enrolled with the Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh, and, also are members of the District Bar Association, Sonepat. The primary occupation of the petitioners is drafting of sale deeds, adoption deeds, wills and certificate of sales etc. and for this purpose, they have installed their kiosks/tin sheds within the Revenue Complex, Sonepat and they have been working there for the last many years.

2. All these writ petitions encompass an identical challenge to an administrative order, which resultantly engenders the amenability thereof for being decided through a common verdict. For the sake of brevity, the relief(s) yearned to be reaped through institution of CWP-6-

2025 is being extracted hereinafter.

3. The prayer embodied in CWP-6-2025 appertains to setting aside of the order dated 27.12.2024 (Annexure P-4), whereby, the respondent No.3- Joint Sub Registrar and Tehsildar, Sonepat, has issued the following directions:-

DEVINDER YADAV 2025.05.30 12:31 (a) Only government approved booths/stalls of size 6x8 can be set up in the Tehsil premises by the authorized deed writers and concerned advocates;

(b) Only those deed writers, who have obtained permission from the Collector, Sonepat, are allowed to work in the Tehsil premises;

(c) It is mandatory for the deed writers to display the Collector’s permission letter at their workplace;

(d) The deed writers must display the fee charged in the documents drafted by them, as per the Haryana Government’s notification dated 12.08.2015.

4. The hereinabove extracted directions, as enclosed in the impugned administrative order, caused pain to the petitioners and propelled them to institute thereagainst the instant writ petition, mainly on the ground that, they are enrolled with the Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh, under The Advocates Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Advocates Act’), hence they are not required to obtain prior permission from any other authority to draft documents (work as deed writers) in the Tehsil/Revenue premises. The directions enclosed in the impugned order are absolutely against the provisions of the Advocates Act, therefore, the same are required to be struck down.

SUBMISSIONS OF THE LEARNED COUNSELS FOR THE PETITIONERS

5. By referring to the mandate enclosed in the Advocates Act, DEVINDER YADAV 2025.05.30 12:31 the learned counsels for the