Bijender Singh vs State Of Haryana And Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 15764 P&H

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                   AT CHANDIGARH

      242                                CWP-3663-2019
                                         Date of decision: 05.12.2022


BIJENDER SINGH                                                  .... Petitioner

                                         Versus

STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS                                     .... Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI
       HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA

Present :     Mr. Aditya yadav, Advocate for the petitioner.

              Mr. Ankur Mittal, Addl., AG, Haryana with
              Mr. Saurabh Mago, AAG, Haryana.

              Mr. Alankrit Bhardwaj, Advocate for respondents No.2 and 3.

                    ****

RITU BAHRI, J. (oral)

Present petition has been filed seeking issuance of an appropriate

writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the Serial No.35 Jhajjar (SC),

schedule-vii Haryana Part-B Assembly Constituencies of Delimitation of

Parliamentary and Assembly Constituencies Order, 1976 (P/1), which is

against the Delimitation of Parliamentary and Assembly Constituencies

Section 8(a&b) vide which constituency Jhajjar for the post of MLA is

reserved for Schedule Caste category since 1976 till today whereas, according

to the Census Statistics 2011, Jat and Yadav are the dominant castes which is

against Article 332(2) of the Constitution of India.

As per the reply filed on behalf of respondents No.2 and 3 the

challenge in this petition is for quashing of Serial No.35 Jhajjar (SC),

1 of 2

schedule-vii Haryana Part-B Assembly Constituencies of Delimitation of

Parliamentary and Assembly Constituencies Order, 1976 ( Annexure P/1). In

the reply reference has been made to Section 10(2) of the Delimitation Act,

2002 [for short 'the Act'] whereas after publication of Gazette of India, such

order cannot be called in question in any Court. Reference has also been made

to a judgment rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court of India in Meghraj

Kothari vs. Delimitation Commission (AIR 1967 SC 669), wherein it has

been held that once delimitation Commission has made orders under Sections 8

and 9 of the Act and they have been published under Section 10(1) of the Act,

the orders had same effect as if they were made law by Parliament itself.

An additional affidavit of Joint Chief Electoral Officer, Haryana

on behalf of respondents No.2 and 3 has also been filed. As per which, in

paragraph 2 and 3, it is stated that Jhajjar has SC population of 19.10% and

having highest percentage of SCs in District Jhajjar and in this backdrop, it

was reserved for Scheduled Castes category and the notification for reservation

for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes has been issued taking into account

the provisions as mentioned in Annexures R-2/2 to R-2/8 over the Amendment

Act.

Dismissed.

                                                    (RITU BAHRI)
                                                       JUDGE




                                                 (MANISHA BATRA)
05.12. 2022                                         JUDGE
Jyoti-IV
                    Whether speaking/reasoned:   Yes/No.
                    Whether reportable     :     Yes/No




                                        2 of 2