GURMAIL KAUR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These six identical writ petitions are being decided vide this common order, as all the six writ petitions are arising out of similar facts and praying for exactly same relief. However, for the facility of reference, facts are being culled out from CWP No.17325 of 2016 (Gurmail Kaur, Panch Vs. State of Punjab and others).

(2.) On asking of the Court, Mr. B.M.Vinayak, DAG, Punjab, who is present in Court, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. Learned counsel for the petitioner, at the very outset, fairly states that so far as the prayer for issuing of writ in the nature of certiorari is concerned, he does not intend to press these writ petitions for a writ in the nature of certiorari. He further submits that he may be permitted to restrict his prayer only for the writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the appellate authority to decide the pending appeals of the petitioners, at an early date and particularly the stay application so that their appeals may not be rendered infructuous.

(3.) However, keeping in view the totality of facts and circumstances of the case and also to ensure that statutory appeals filed by the petitioners may not be rendered infructuous, it is directed that till the stay applications or the appeals are heard and decided by the appellate authority, operation of the orders challenged in appeals, shall remain stayed.