IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

276 (3 cases) CWP-23043-2019 (O&M)

Date of decision : 11.02.2025 PROGRESSIVE PRIVATE SCHOOLS ASSOCIATION ...... Petitioner VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ...... Respondents

2. CWP-29087-2019 (O&M)

KARNAL INDEPENDENT SCHOOLS ASSOCIATION AND ANOTHER ...... Petitioners VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ...... Respondent

3. CWP-6753-2020 (O&M)

AJAY SAMITI ...... Petitioner VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ...... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI ***

Present :- Mr. Sachin Jain, Advocate for the petitioner (in CWP-23043-2019).

Mr. R. Kartikeya, Advocate for the petitioners (in CWP-29087-2019).

Mr. J. P. Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner (in CWP-6753-2020).

Mr. Saurabh Girdhar, AAG, Haryana.

Mr. Satya Pal Jain, Addl. Solicitor General of India for respondent No.5 (in CWP-23043-2019 and CWP-29087-2019).

***

Harsimran Singh Sethi, J. (Oral)

1. By this common order, three writ petitions, the details of which have been given in the heading, are being decided as these petitions involve the same question of law on similar facts and the facts are being taken from CWP-23043 of 2019.

2. The present petition has been filed challenging the order dated 31.10.2018 (Annexure P-7) by which, keeping in view the order dated 31.10.2018 upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, the diesel vehicles which are more than 10 year old and the petrol vehicles which are more than 15 years old are not to ply in the various Districts of the State of Haryana falling in the National Capital Region (NCR) in terms of the order passed by the National Green Tribunal dated 07.04.2015 (Annexure P-1).

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that the Districts Mahendragarh and Karnal in the State of Haryana do not fall in the NCR keeping in view the order passed by the National Green Tribunal wherein, the Districts of the State of Haryana which fall under the NCR have already been depicted in the said order dated 15.12.2015 and therefore, the inclusion of the Districts Mahendragarh and Karnal in the NCR is arbitrary and illegal

15.12.2015 which has been upheld by Hon'ble the Supreme Court of India.

4. Learned State counsel for the respondent-State on the other hand submits that as per the notification dated 01.10.2013 (Annexure R-1), the Districts Mahendragarh and even District Karnal comes within the 40 Districts of Haryana which are part of the NCR which includes Faridabad, Gurugram, Nuh, Rohtak, Sonipat, Rewari, Jhajjar, Panipat, Palwal, Bhiwani, Charkhi Dadri, Jind and Karnal other than Mahendragarh.

5. Learned State counsel submits that once a notification has already been issued qua Mahendergarh and Karnal, which notification is not under challenge, the grievance being raised by the petitioner that District Mahendergarh and Karnal are not the part of the NCR, is incorrect.

6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record with their able assistance.

7. The first argument which has been raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the impugned order 31.10.2018 (Annexure P-7) has been passed on the basis of the order passed by the Green Tribunal dated

15.12.2015, which has been upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order dated 15.12.2015 passed by the Green Tribunal has been appended as Annexure P-3 according to which, Gurugram, Bahadurgarh, Faridabad, Gajiabad and Noida have been mentioned and therefore, no other District other than the been included as a part of the NCR and not the others including District under:-

“The matter taken up on mentioning.

It is brought to our notice that there is a typographical error in the order dated 11^th December, 2015.

At the page No.6 in paragraph 1 NCR and Faridabad is omitted to be shown it is corrected and the correct paragraph is as follows:

“Obviously, reasonably good number of vehicle are also being registered at NCR i.e. Gurgaon, Bahadurgarh, Farid