Himachal Pradesh High Court
Decided On: 04.01.202 vs State Of Himachal Pradesh & Others on 4 January, 2021
Bench: Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Jyotsna Rewal Dua
HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
AT SHIMLA
CWP No.6342/2020
Reserved on: 01.01.2021
.
Decided on: 04.01.2020
Om Parkash ...Petitioner.
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh & others . ..Respondents.
.......................................................................................
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge.
Hon'ble Ms Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1 No.
For the petitioner : Mr. Sudhir Thakur, Sr. Advocate with Mr.
Karun Negi, Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. Ashok Sharma, Advocate General
with Mr. Vinod Thakur, Mr. Vikas
Rathore, Mr. Shiv Pal Manhans, Mr.
Nand Lal Thakur, Additional Advocates
General, Mr. Bhupinder Thakur, Ms.
Seema Sharma, & Mr. Yudhvir Thakur
Deputy Advocate Generals, for
respondents/State.
Mr. Ajeet Singh Saklani, Advocate, for
Election Commission.
(Through Video conferencing)
Jyotsna Rewal Dua.
Prayer in this petition is for quashing the notification
dated 16.12.2020 issued under Section 125 of Himachal Pradesh
Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
Panchayati Raj Act read with Rules 28 & 87 of H.P. Panchayati
Raj (Election), to the extent Gram Panchayat Dilman,
.
Development Block Pacchad, District Sirmour, H.P., has been
reflected as reserved for members belonging to Scheduled Caste
category (open) in ensuing Elections 20202021 to the Panchayati
Raj institutions in the State.
2. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner contends
that the concerned Gram Panchayat had been continuously
reserved from 1995 onwards and, therefore, in this election, it is
required to be kept open for male members belonging to General
Category. Giving further details, learned Senior Counsel submits
that the concerned Gram Panchayat was reserved for Scheduled
Caste Category in 1995 elections, for women belonging to
unreserved category in 2000, for women belonging to Scheduled
Caste Category in 2005, for women belonging to Scheduled Caste
Category in 2010, for women belonging to General Category in
2015, and in ensuing 202021 elections it has been reserved as
Scheduled Caste (open). This, according to learned Senior
Counsel amounts to denial of opportunity of fair representation to
the male members belonging to General Category.
Learned Advocate General submitted that as per the
amended provisions of H.P. Panchayati Raj Act and Rules framed
.
thereunder, Election year 2010 has been taken as the base year
for implementation of Election Reservation Roster. Therefore, it
is only thereafter that the Election Reservation Roster is to be
rotated and has accordingly been rotated in accordance with
applicable provisions of H.P. Pachayati Raj Act 1994 and the H.P.
Panchayati Raj (Election) Rules. By applying the Election
Reservation Roster inconsonance with the principle of rotation
envisaged under the Act and Rules, the post of Pradhan in the
concerned Gram Panchayat has been reserved for the members
belonging to Scheduled Caste Category (open) in ensuing
elections to Panchayati Raj institutions.
No legal and cogent argument in support of plea
raised in the writ petition has been advanced with respect to the
prayers made in the writ petition. Petitioner has failed to
substantiate the plea of Election Reservation Roster having been
wrongly applied to the seat in question or that the seat was
essentially required to be kept open for General Category.
Accordingly we do not find any merit in the instant petition and
the same is dismissed. The parties are left to bear their own costs.
Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.
.
(Tarlok Singh Chauhan)
Judge
(Jyotsna Rewal Dua)
Judge
January 4th, 2021 (rohit)
