IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

109+110 CWP-1936-2026 (O&M)

Date of Decision :29.01.2026 Saket Dhingra and another ...Petitioners Versus State of Haryana & others ....Respondents CWP-1946-2023 (O&M)

Narender Monu Rao @ Narender Rao & another ...Petitioners Versus State of Haryana & others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS SURI Present: Mr. Ajay Jain, Advocate for the petitioner(s) in both petitions.

Ms. Anu Pal, Addl. A.G. Haryana (keeping in view advance copy served).

Mr. Ashish Yadav, Advocate for respondent No.5-MC.

* * *

Harsimran Singh Sethi, J. (Oral)

1. In the present petitions, the challenge is to the impugned notifications dated 15.09.2025 (Annexure P/4), dated 10.12.2025 (Annexure P/7), dated 24.12.2025 (Annexure P/8), dated 14.01.2025 (Annexure P-10) and letter dated 26.12.2025 (Annexure P/9) issued by the Government of Haryana by which, the wards have been delimited in the Municipal Council, Rewari.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner(s) argues that he has two folds grievance. Firstly, that the delimitation of wards of Municipal Council, Rewari has been done on the basis of incorrect population data and though the objections qua the same were called for but, the same have not been taken into consideration while passing ultimate notification of delimiting the wards hence, the delimitation of wards has been finalized without dealing with the objection raised on behalf of the petitioners.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner(s) further submits that even the benefit of reservation of wards which is to be granted to the backward class as per the constitution, the wards which were having maximum population of the said reserved category have not been reserved for the same, the present case is one where three wards having maximum population belonging to the reserved category of backward class have been taken into consideration and out of the said three wards, one has been chosen on the basis of draw of lots to grant the benefit of reservation for backward class which is incorrect as, the reservation has to be done on the basis of the ward which is having maximum population of the reserved category of backward class.

4. Keeping in view the advance copy served, Ms. Anu Pal, Addl. A.G. Haryana appears and has assisted the Court on behalf of State of Haryana though notice of motion was yet to be issued.

5. Learned State counsel submits that the assertion which is being raised at the hands of the petitioner(s) that the data of population which has been taken into consideration for delimitation of wards is incorrect cannot be accepted for the reason that vide Notification dated 11.09.2025 (Annexure P/3), the population of District Rewari had already been notified and nothing was brought to the notice of the authorities concerned that said data is incorrect except for the bald statement by learned counsel for the petitioner(s) that the said data of population notified is incorrect.

6. Learned State counsel further submits that though, an assertion is being made by learned counsel for the petitioners that the population of 1,62,781/-, as mentioned in the Notification dated 11.09.2025 (Annexure P/3) is incorrect but even while filing the present petitions, the said notification has not been challenged on any cogent ground to show that same is bad.

7. Learned State counsel further submits that the benefit of reservation which is to be granted with regard to the wards, is to be done as per Section 10 of the Haryana Municipal Act, 1973, as amended vide Act No.24 of 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘1973 Act’) which has come into force w.e.f. 16.05.2023 and as per said provision as far as the reservation of wards for the backward class is to be granted, the same has to be done by taking into consideration the three wards which have the maximum population of backward class and thereafter to grant reservation in the ward on the basis of the draw of lots among