IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Vivek Singh Thakur, Romesh Verma, JJ.
Dikken Kumar Thakur & Anr. - Petitioners
Versus
The State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. - Respondents
CWPIL No.115 of 2025
Decided On : 09-01-2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. mandamus sought for pri elections pre-term expiry (Para 3 , 19) |
| 2. pri terms expire 31.01.2026; delimitation completed (Para 4) |
| 3. delimitation timelines extended, reservations delayed (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. sdma order postpones elections citing disasters (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 5. art 243e mandates five-year pri duration (Para 18) |
| 6. sc enforces timely local elections despite calamities (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 7. dm act overrides for disaster management (Para 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36) |
| 8. sec needs 100-160 days post-delimitation for elections (Para 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42) |
| 9. state obstructs sec despite post-disaster normalcy (Para 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47) |
| 10. prior delimitations valid; pr act deems dissolution on expiry (Para 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56) |
| 11. constitution prevails over dm act for elections (Para 57 , 58 , 59 , 60) |
| 12. state delays unjustified; harmonious coordination needed (Para 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 67 , 68) |
| 13. elections by 30.04.2026 under sec superintendence (Para 69 , 70 , 71 , 72) |
Vivek Singh Thakur, J.
Petitioners have approached this Court in public interest for issuance of directions to the respondents to conduct elections and complete the election process before expiry of term of Panchayati Raj Institutions in the State of Himachal Pradesh, as provided under Article 243E of the Constitution of India, seeking the following substantive reliefs: -
“1. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the Respondents to ensure that the elections to the Panchayati Raj Institutions in the State of Himachal Pradesh are conducted before the expiry of their five-year term, as mandated under Article 243-E of the Constitution of India; and/or
2. Direct the State Election Commission to forthwith notify the election schedule and take all consequential steps for holding free and fair elections to the Panchayati Raj Institutions without further delay; and/or
3. Declare that any attempt to continue the existing Panchayati Raj Institutions beyond their term of five years is unconstitutional and void ab initio; and/or”
2. Vide Notification dated 17.11.2025 (Annexure R-2/12) by By invoking powers conferred under Article 243K(1) and 243ZA(1) of the Constitution of India, Section 161 of the Himachal Pradesh Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (in short ‘PR Act’), Section 281(1) the Himachal Pradesh Municipal Act, 1994 (in short ‘MC Act’), Section 9(1) of the Himachal Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act, 1994 (in short ‘Corporation Act’) read with first proviso of Clause 2.1 of the Himachal Pradesh Panchayats and Municipalities Model Code of Conduct, 2020, Clause 12.1 of Model Code of Conduct, 2020, was enforced with immediate effect throughout the State of Himachal Pradesh by State Election Commission which reads as under:-
“12.1 The structure, classification or area of the Panchayats and Municipalities shall not be altered after the issue of Notification by the State Election Commission enforcing this clause, till the election process is over.”
3. It is undisputed that terms of Panchayati Raj Institutions in Himachal Pradesh are going to expire on 31.01.2026, as also evident from Notification dated 17.11.2025 (Annexure R-2/12). It has been further notified in this notification that delimitation of Panchayati Raj Institutions in respect of 3577 Gram Panchayats, 90 Panchayat Samitis, 11 Zila Parishads and 71 Urban Local Bodies, has been completed and stands finally notified with further declaration that electoral rolls of 3548 Gram Panchayats and 70 Urban Local Bodies (‘ULBs’) have been finally prepared after following due process of law and, electoral rolls of 29 Gram Panchayats and one ULB is scheduled to be finalized on 01.12.2025 and 07.12.2025, respectively.
4. It has been further notified that term of 50 Urban Local Bodies, 4 Municipal Corporations (Dharamshala, Palampur, Mandi & Solan) and 5 Nagar P
Vikas Kishanrao Gawali v. State of Maharashtra
Kishansing Tomar v. Ahmedabad Municipal Corpn.
Vikas Kishanrao Gawali v. State of Maharashtra
Rahul Ramesh Wagh vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors.
Suresh Mahajan vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Anr.
Kishansing Tomar vs. Municipal Corporation of the City of Ahmedabad & Ors.
Article 243E mandates elections to Panchayati Raj Institutions before five-year term expiry; Disaster Management Act orders cannot override this constitutional duty absent proven exceptional circumst....
Delimitation after panchayat reorganization mandates strict adherence to 7-day objection and appeal timelines; curtailment to 3 days and rushed processes invalid; conduct elections using prior valid ....
Amendments to Panchayati Raj election rules must comply with constitutional provisions, including reservation based on population, not arbitrary criteria, with necessary prior consultation.
Election – Delay in - When the Commission itself has admitted that it is duty bound to conduct the election and complete the process at the earliest, it is only appropriate that it takes expeditious ....
Non-conduct of municipal elections for over seven years constitutes a violation of constitutional duties and governance principles, warranting a writ of mandamus to uphold democratic processes.
The court reaffirmed the constitutional mandate for timely elections, ruling that delays based on incomplete formalities are impermissible in a democratic setup.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.