SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(HP) 2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
VIVEK SINGH THAKUR, RANJAN SHARMA, JJ.
Bal Krishan & Ors. – Petitioners
Versus 
State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. – Respondents
CWP No.2798 of 2026
Decided On : 06-04-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners:Mr. Ashok Kumar, Advocate.
For the Respondents:Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Additional Advocate General.

The formation of a Nagar Panchayat must adhere to legal provisions, considering local objections, and serving public interest, with no violation of constitutional rights established.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Articles 14 and 243 - Petitioners challenged the constitution and declaration of Nagar Panchayat Swarghat alleging arbitrariness and violation of legal rights - Petitioners claimed that the inclusion of their Gram Panchayats would harm agricultural livelihoods and impose undue burdens. (Paras 1, 10, 12)

(B) Administrative Law - The creation of Nagar Panchayat necessitates due consideration of locals’ objections and serves public interest; the State provided evidence of urbanization and necessity as per Section 3 of the Himachal Pradesh Municipal Act, 1994. (Paras 12, 16)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners, residents of Gram Panchayats Kutehla and Manjhed, opposed their inclusion in Nagar Panchayat Swarghat, citing potential harm to their agricultural rights and lack of public consent. Prior petitions highlighted delays in processing their objections, prompting this latest challenge.

Findings of Court:
Court found no violation of Articles 14 and 243 or arbitrary actions; the notifications were in line with legal procedures with adequate justification for the Nagar Panchayat’s formation.

Issues: Whether the inclusion of Gram Panchayats Kutehla and Manjhed in the Nagar Panchayat was arbitrary and disregarded local objections.

Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that the administrative decision for the Nagar Panchayat’s creation was not arbitrary, having adhered to statutory requirements and public interest considerations. The objections were adequately considered, thereby not warranting judicial interference.

Result: Petition dismissed.

Table of Content
1. valid constitution of nagar panchayat. (Para 1 , 2 , 4)
2. petitioners' objections to notification. (Para 3 , 10 , 11)
3. respondents' justification for nagar panchayat. (Para 12 , 13 , 14)
4. evidence supporting the constitution of nagar panchayat. (Para 15 , 16)
5. court's decision to dismiss the petition. (Para 17)

JUDGMENT :

VIVEK SINGH THAKUR, J.

By way of the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioners have assailed inclusion of Gram Panchayat Kutehla and Gram Panchayat Manjhed for constitution and declaration of Nagar Panchayat Swarghat, District Bilaspur, vide impugned notification dated 25.02.2026 (Annexure P-11), issued by respondents, alleging the same to be arbitrary, illegal, and violative of Articles 14 and 243 of the Constitution of India.

2. This is the third round of litigation. The respondents had notified proposal for declaration of Nagar Panchayat Swarghat vide notification dated 23.11.2024 (Annexure P-2), inviting objections from affected persons through Deputy Commissioner, Bilaspur, within a period of two weeks.

3. Petitioner has filed objections against inclusion of Gram Panchayats Kutehla and Manjhed, including residents of village Thapna, in the proposed Nagar Panchayat, Swargaht, on the ground that all of them are viullagers and intend to live in Gram Panchayats, as creation of a Nagar Panchayat would cause maximum loss to the farmers/villagers dependent upon agriculture, as after creation of the Nagar Panchayat, they will be deprived of the benefits available to rural areas. They would be required to get maps approved/sanctioned for construction of houses or any other building, whereas the majority of residents of Gram Panchayats are poor and not in a position to pay taxes, etc., leviable in Nagar Panchayat, nor are they capable of bearing cumbersome rules and terms applicable to a municipal area.

4. For the first time, petitioner had approached this Court by filing CWP No.15500 of 2024 (Bal Krishan & Ors. vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors.) with the grievance that objections filed by the petitioner(s) qua the formation of Nagar Panchayat Swarghat by including their respective Gram Panchayats, were not being disposed of in a time-bound manner, creating a situation of uncertainty. The said petition was disposed by learned Single Judge vide order dated 18.12.2024 on the basis of statement of learned Advocate General that State was in process of completing all codal formalities and liberty was granted to the petitioners to file appropriate proceedings in appropriate Court of law, if required and desired. t

5. Vide notification dated 20.12.2024, Department of Urban Development, Government of Himachal Pradesh, constituted Nagar Panchayat Swarghat, District Bilaspur.

6. Petitioners had also assailed the draft notification dated 23.11.2024 (Annexure P-2) by filing CWP No.2906 of 2025 (Bal Krishan & Ors. vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors.). The respondents had placed on record the final notification dated 20.12.2024, which was issued in furtherance of the draft notification dated 23.11.2024. The said CWP was decided on 18.12.2025 (Annexure P-10) by quashing and setting aside the draft notification dated 22.11.2024 (Annexure P-2) as well as the final notification dated 20.12.2024, with directions to the Secretary, Urban Development, to consider the objections of the petitioners and to take an appropriate decision in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably on or before 10.01.2026, by passing a reasoned and speaking order after providing a personal hearing to the petitioners.

7. In sequel to aforesaid order, vide notice dated 26.12.2025 petitioners/objectors were summoned for personal hearing on 31.12.2025. After considering the objections and giving personal hearing to the petitioners/objectors, the Director, Urban Development, recommended rejection of the objections, and creation of Nagar Puanchayat Swarghat. Vide office order dated 09.02.2026

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top