Himachal Pradesh High Court
Suresh Chand And Another vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And ... on 4 January, 2021
Bench: Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Jyotsna Rewal Dua
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
CWP No.6303 of 2020
Decided on: 4th January, 2021
.
____________________________________________________________
Suresh Chand and another
.....Petitioners
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh and others
.....Respondents
_____________________________________________________________
Coram
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge
The Hon'ble Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge
1 Whether approved for reporting?
______________________________________________________
For the petitioners: Mr. Goldy Kumar, Advocate.
For the respondents: Mr. Ashok Sharma, Advocate
General with Mr. Vinod Thakur,
Mr. Vikas Rathore & Mr. Shiv Pal
Manhans, Additional Advocates
General and Ms. Seema Sharma,
Mr. Bhupinder Thakur &
Mr. Yudhvir Singh Thakur,
Deputy Advocates General, for
respondents No.1 to 3-State.
Mr. Ajeet Singh Saklani,
Advocate, for respondent No.4.
(Through Video Conferencing)
Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge
Challenge in this writ petition is to the notification
dated 17.12.2020 issued by the respondents under Section
.
125 of the H.P. Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 read with Rule 87 of
the H.P. Panchayati Raj (Election) Rules, to the extent
different wards in Gram Panchayat Narwana Khas falling in
Development Block Dharamshala, District Kangra have been
reserved for members belonging to different categories.
The grievance of the petitioner is that the seat of
Ward Member in Ward No.5 of Gram Panchayat Narwana
Khas has never been reserved for Scheduled Caste category
in previous elections. Therefore, in the ensuing 2020-21
elections to Panchayati Raj Institutions in the respondents-
State, the post of Ward Member in Ward No.5 of the said
gram panchayat is required to be reserved for Members
belonging to Scheduled Caste.
2. Learned Advocate General submitted that seats in
gram panchayats are allocated as per election reservation
roster prepared in accordance with the provisions of relevant
Statute and election rules. Further, allocation of seats and
reservation to the post of Ward Members in 2020-21 elections
to Panchayati Raj Institutions has been worked out according
to population census 2011. The election roster has
accordingly been applied and rotated from its implementation
.
since 2010, which has been taken as the base year for
application and rotation of election reservation roster.
Learned Advocate General next pointed out that as per
Section 8 of H.P. Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 read with Rule 87
of H.P. Panchayati Raj (Election) Rules, if the total population
of Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe in a block is less than
5% of the total population, then no office is to be reserved for
them. It is pointed out by learned Advocate General that as
per population census 2011, the total population percentage
of Scheduled Caste in accordance with the provisions of
relevant Statute and Rule has been determined as 0.4641.
Therefore, no seat could be reserved for Scheduled Caste
category. Learned counsel for the petitioner failed to rebut the
above legal and factual submissions made on behalf of the
respondents-State.
In absence of any cogent and legal rebuttal to the
submissions made on behalf of the respondents-State, we
find no merit in the instant writ petition and the same is
accordingly dismissed alongwith pending miscellaneous
application(s), if any.
.
(Tarlok Singh Chauhan)
Judge
(Jyotsna Rewal Dua)
January 04, 2021 Judge
(Mukesh)
r to
