[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Punjab-Haryana High Court
Amandeep Singh And Others vs State Of Punjab And Others on 12 December, 2025
Author: Gurvinder Singh Gill
Bench: Gurvinder Singh Gill
In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana
At Chandigarh
CWP-36077-2025 (O&M)
Date of Decision:-12.12.2025
Amandeep Singh and others ... Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others ... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE RAMESH KUMARI
Present:- Mr. D.S. Patwalia, Senior Advocate with
Mr. Ramandeep Singh, Advocate and
Mr. Paras Chander Kashyap, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Rahul Rampal, Additional Advocate General, Punjab.
*****
GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J. (Oral)
1. The petitioners, who are all resident of District Sahibzada Ajit Singh Nagar
(SAS Nagar), Mohali assail notification dated 10.9.2025 (Annexure P-3)
issued by Department of Rural Development and Panchayat, Government of
Punjab, in exercise of powers conferred by Sections 163 and 164 of Punjab
Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, wherein the territorial constituencies pertaining to
Zila Parishad, District SAS Nagar have been redefined/notified; and also
notification dated 10.9.2025 (Annexure P-2) issued by Department of Rural
Development and Panchayat, Government of Punjab, wherein the territorial
constituencies pertaining to elections to members of the Panchayat Samities
have been redefined/notified.
2. It may here be mentioned that as far as notification dated 10.9.2025
(Annexure P-3) is concerned, the petitioners are no longer aggrieved
PANKAJ KAKKAR
2025.12.12 16:08
I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of
this order/judgment
Punjab & Haryana High Court at
Chandigarh
CWP-36077-2025 (O&M) (2)
inasmuch as the elections to Zila Parishad, District SAS Nagar have already
been postponed and as such the petitioners do not press upon their petition
qua said notification at this stage.
3. The petitioners' contention is primarily to the effect that once exercise of
'delimitation' pertaining to Zila Parishad as well as Panchayat Samiti Blocks
had been undertaken in the month of August, 2025 vide notification dated
8.8.2025 (Annexure P-1) and thereafter elections to the Zila Parishad and
Panchayat Samities had been announced by respondent No.2 - Punjab State
Elections Commission on 28.11.2025 and in respect of which a formal
notification had also been issued on 1.12.2025 (Annexure P-7), it was not
open to the respondent - State to tinker with the Zila Parishad/Panchayat
Samities Blocks, whereas by virtue of notification dated 28.11.2025
published on 29.11.2025 (Annexure P-4), the respondent - State has taken out
15 villages out of the purview of Panchayat Samiti, Mohali Block and have
included said villages in the schedule of boundary of Municipal Corporation,
District SAS Nagar. In other words, said 15 villages were taken out of the
purview of election to the Panchayat Samities Mohali Block.
4. Pursuant to issuance of notice of motion on 8.12.2025, Mr. Akshay Kumar,
AAG, Punjab had accepted notice on behalf of the respondent - State.
5. Short reply by way of affidavit of Mr. Uma Shankar Gupta, Special Secretary,
Department of Rural Development and Panchayats, Punjab has been filed by
learned State counsel, which is taken on record.
6. The stand taken by the State in the aforesaid reply is that the State is fully
competent to add/exclude any area to the Municipal Corporation and that the
same is a legislative function. It has been submitted that by virtue of
PANKAJ KAKKAR
2025.12.12 16:08
I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of
this order/judgment
Punjab & Haryana High Court at
Chandigarh
CWP-36077-2025 (O&M) (3)
notification dated 28.11.2025 (published on 29.11.2025) (Annexure P-4), out
of the 4 Panchayat Samities Blocks, District SAS Nagar, 3 of the blocks are
untouched i.e. Majri, Kharar and Derabassi and that only 15 Gram Panchayats
out of Panchayat Samiti Mohali Block have been taken out and have been
merged with Municipal Corporation, District SAS Nagar, which infact is a
kind of upgradation of the said area and for which the State was duly
competent.
7. Learned State counsel has further informed that, in any case, the elections to
Zila Parishad, District SAS Nagar and Pancyhayat Samities, Mohali Block
stand postponed, whereas the elections to the untouched three blocks i.e.
Majri, Kharar and Derabassi will be held as per the schedule notified vide
notification dated 1.12.2025 (Annexure P-7).
8. Learned State counsel has vehemently argued that the writ petition so as to
assail notification pertaining to delimitation/shifting etc. is not maintainable
in view of the specific bar enshrined under Article 243(O) of Constitution of
India, which is reproduced hereinunder:
"243(O): Bar to interference by courts in electoral matters
Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution-
(a) the validity of any law relating to the delimitation of
constituencies or the allotment of seals to such constituencies
made or purporting to be made under article 243K, shall not
be called in question in any court.
(b) no election to any Panchayat shall be called in question
except by an election petition presented to such authority and
in such manner as is provided for by or under any Law made
by the legislature of a State."
PANKAJ KAKKAR
2025.12.12 16:08
I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of
this order/judgment
Punjab & Haryana High Court at
Chandigarh
CWP-36077-2025 (O&M) (4)
9. As against the aforesaid objection of maintainability, learned counsel for the
petitioners presses into service judgments passed by Hon'ble the Apex Court
rendered in Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) Versus Secretary,
Governor's Secretariat and others, (2020) 6 Supreme Court Cases 548 as
well as in Union Territory of Ladakh and others Versus Jammu and Kashmir
National Conference and another, 2023 SCC Online SC 1140 so as to contend
that the Bar of Article 243(O) of Constitution of India is not absolute and in
fit cases the Court can interfere. Para No.37 in Union Territory of Ladakh's
case (supra) reads as under:
"37. We would indicate that the restraint, self-imposed, by the Courts
as a general principle, laid out in some detail in some of the
decisions supra, in election matters to the extent that once a
notification is Issued and the election process starts, the
Constitutional Courts, under normal circumstances are loath to
interfere, is not a contentious issue. But where issues crop up,
Indicating unjust executive action or an attempt to disturb a level-
playing field between candidates and/or political parties with no
justifiable or intelligible basis, the Constitutional Courts are
required, nay they are duty-bound, to step in. The reason that the
Courts have usually maintained a hands-off approach is with the
sole salutary objective of ensuring that the elections, which are a
manifestation of the will of the people, are taken to their logical
conclusion, without delay or dilution thereof. In the context of
providing appropriate succor to the aggrieved litigant at the
appropriate time, the learned Single Judge acted rightly. In all
fairness, we must note that the learned ASG, during the course of
arguments, did not contest the power per se of the High Court to
issue the directions it did, except that the same amounted to
denying the Appellants their discretion. As stated hereinbefore,
we are satisfied that in view of the 1968 Order, the Appellants'
PANKAJ KAKKAR
2025.12.12 16:08
I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of
this order/judgment
Punjab & Haryana High Court at
Chandigarh
CWP-36077-2025 (O&M) (5)
discretion was not unbridled, and rather, it was guided by the
1968 Order."
10. We have heard learned counsel representing the petitioners as well as learned
State counsel and have also gone through the impugned notifications.
11. Although this Court finds that once a delimitation exercise had been
conducted on 8.8.2025 and thereafter the elections had also been announced,
under these circumstances, the State ideally should not have chosen to tinker
with any kind of modification pertaining to territorial boundary of Zila
Parishad, but in any case we find that in the instant case the respondent -
State has not taken out any village so as to merge the said village in any other
Panchayat Samiti, but has, in a way upgraded a part of the area falling in the
area of Panchayat Samiti Mohali Block and included the same in Municipal
Corporation, District SAS, Nagar. In other words, while the other three
Panchayat Samities Blocks i.e. Majri, Kharar and Derabassi are unaffected, it
is only the territorial limit of Panchayat Samiti, Mohali Block, which has, in a
way, shrunk to some extent as a part of it has been upgraded and added in the
schedule of boundary of Municipal Corporation.
12. Since learned State counsel has also informed that the State is going ahead
with the elections to the other Panchayat Samities Blocks of the district and it
is only the election to Pancyhayat Samiti, Mohali Block, which has been
postponed, we do not find any reason so as to set aside any of the
notifications, which are under challenge and the same are hereby upheld. The
respondent - State is, however, directed to ensure that the elections to the
remaining three blocks are conducted smoothly and that the elections to the
Panchayat Samiti Mohali Block is also conducted at the earliest after
PANKAJ KAKKAR
2025.12.12 16:08
I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of
this order/judgment
Punjab & Haryana High Court at
Chandigarh
CWP-36077-2025 (O&M) (6)
following due procedure in accordance with law after the elections to the
other 3 Panchayat Samities are over.
13. The instant petition stands disposed off accordingly.
( GURVINDER SINGH GILL )
JUDGE
12.12.2025 ( RAMESH KUMARI )
Pankaj JUDGE
Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No
Whether Reportable Yes / No
PANKAJ KAKKAR
2025.12.12 16:08
I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of
this order/judgment
Punjab & Haryana High Court at
Chandigarh
