Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Ritu Bahri, Meenakshi I. Mehta, JJ.
Ashok Kumar Kadwasara & Anr. – Appellants
Versus
State Of Haryana & Ors. – Respondents
CWP-11710 of 2021
Decided On : 19-05-2022
Wardbandi - Panchayat Samiti and Zila Parishad - Haryana Panchayati Raj Election Rules 1994, Rule 4(6), Rule 4(8) - The court discussed the objections raised regarding the wardbandi of Panchayat Samiti and Zila Parishad, highlighting the population distribution and the need to maintain the uniformity of population in PS wards. The court also emphasized the importance of maintaining the compactness of wards and the due process of law followed in issuing the final wardbandi.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners sought setting aside of orders related to the wardbandi of Panchayat Samiti and Zila Samiti, citing non-speaking and non-reasoned dismissal of their objections. The court analyzed the objections and the process followed in issuing the final wardbandi.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the objections were duly considered and rejected based on the population distribution and the need to maintain the compactness of wards. The final wardbandi was issued after following due process of law and giving the petitioners an opportunity of hearing.
Issues: Dismissal of objections, population distribution, compactness of wards, due process of law
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of maintaining uniformity of population in PS wards and the compactness of wards, and found that the objections were duly considered and rejected based on these principles.
Final Decision: The final wardbandi of Panchayat Samiti and Zila Samiti dated 28.05.2021 was upheld by the court, emphasizing the adherence to due process of law and the consideration of objections.
JUDGMENT
Ritu Bahri, J. - Through the present writ petition, the petitioners are seeking setting aside of order dated 24.05.2021 (P-7); order dated 30.04.2021 (P-6); final wardbandi of Panchayat Samiti and Zila Samiti dated 28.05.2021 (P-8 and P-9).
2. Brief facts of the case are that the initial list of Wardbandi for the purpose of holding elections of Panchayat Samiti and Zila Parishad Tosham was issued on 26.04.2021 as per Rule 4(6) of the Haryana Panchayati Raj Election Rules 1994 (for short 'Rules 1994'). The copy of the initial list of Wardbandi of Panchayat Samiti and Zila Parishad are attached as Annexures P-1 and P-2. The objections were to be decided from 30.04.2021 to 05.05.2021 as per Rule 4 (6) of Rules, 1994 and appeal, if any, against the order of SDO (C), was to be filed before the Deputy Commissioner within three days i.e. from 06.05.2021 to 08.05.2021 as per Rule 4 (8) and the Deputy Commissioner was required to decide the appeal from 10.05.2021 to 19.05.2021 and the final publication of wards was to be published on 20.05.2021.
3. Thereafter, the petitioners and others filed certain objections before the Sub Divisional Officer (Civil) Tosham that Village Patodi Khurd, which comes in Ward No.21 of Panchayat Samiti. The Hadbast of Village Patodi Khurd and Patodi Kalan is same, which is known as Patodi. However Panchayats are two and the population of both villages are approximately equal to the ward of one Panchayat Samiti. In Ward No.21, the Wards No.15 to 18 of Village Sandwa Panchayat have been included, these all three wards be removed from our Panchayat Samiti Ward No.21 and our both villages be kept in Ward No.21 separately. The copy of the objection dated 29.04.2021 is Annexure P-3.
3. Petitioner No.1 also raised the objection regarding Wardbandi of Zila Parishad that Ward No.12 of Zila Parishad Miran, Gakhpura Kalan, Gakhpura Khurd and Chapar Jogiyan be included in Ward No.13 of Zila Parishad. Further from Ward No.13 of Zila Parishad Village Sandwa, Bushan, Sahlewal, Hasan be included in Ward No.13 of Zila Parishad. Further requested to include Village Alampur, Pilorh, Kharkadi, Sohan, Dabrik in Ward No. 12 from Ward No. 14 of Zila Parishad. The copy of objection dated 29.04.2021 is Annexure P-4.
4. Petitioner No.2 also raised objection and requested for change in Ward No.12, 13 of Zila Parishad and requested that three villages Garanpura Kalan, Garanpura Khurd and Chappar Jogiyan be included in Ward No. 13 instead of Ward No. 12 on the ground that these villages are within 10-15 km from Ward No.13. Copy of objection dated 29.04.2021 is Annexure P-5.
5. The grievance of the petitioners before this Court is that their objections were dismissed vide non speaking and non-reasoned order, while passing the impugned order 30.04.2021 (P-6).
6. Petitioners filed appeal before Lower Appellate Authority and the appeal was dismissed, vide order 24.05.2021(P-7). Thereafter the final publication has been done for the Wardbandi of Panchayat Samiti as well as Zila Samiti on 28.05.2021 (P-8 and P-9).
7. On notice of the petition, a reply dated 25.07.2021 has been filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 2 and 3 and in preliminary submission, it has been stated that the Zila Parishad, Bhiwani comprised of 30 wards in the 5th PRI term (2016 -2021). Thereafter, the District Charkhi Dadri was constituted from District Bhiwani and the 9 Wards of Zila Parishad, Bhiwani were shifted to District Charkhi Dadri and the Govt. has re-fixed the wards for Zila Parishad(ZP), Bhiwani to 22 from remaining 21 wards. Therefore, the Wardbandi was necessary to be done again due to increase of number of Wards. Now, by considering the population of Panchayat Samitis (PS) and compactness of Wards, the respondent no. 1 decided to increase one ward of Zila Parishad in Block Tosham being highest population as in the Year 2020 four Villages namely Bhera, Dhani-Dariyapur, Dariyapur and Chanana are included in Block Tosham from Block Siwani. There were 3 Zila Pa
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of maintaining uniformity of population in Panchayat Samiti wards and the compactness of wards, and the adherence to due process of ....
The lottery for reservation was conducted in conformity with Rule 9 of the Rules of 1994 and subsequent notifications did not change the constituency of the reserved categories, thus no intervention ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that if objections were invited, raised, and rejected by the relevant authority, the court cannot entertain the challenge to the delimitation of Pa....
The court emphasized the principle that challenges to electoral matters, especially when elections are imminent, should not be entertained, as per Article 243-O.
Limited scope of judicial review in administrative actions and impermissibility of interference in electoral matters after the commencement of the election process
Courts cannot entertain challenges to the formation of wards and reservation of seats for village Panchayats due to the provisions of Article 243-O and the decision in Jadhav Shankar Dyandeo vs. Coll....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the limited scope of judicial review in administrative actions, emphasizing the prevention of arbitrariness, irrationality, unreasonableness, bias,....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
