Once an election process for a Municipal Corporation is underway following the notification of an election schedule, courts are barred from intervening, particularly when such intervention would postpone or obstruct the election schedule, unless a clear case of legal infraction is substantiated.

* * *

Harsimran Singh Sethi, J. (Oral)

1. In the present petition, the challenge is to the various actions performed by the State of Haryana with regard to the Municipal Corporation, Panchkula, which includes the delimitation of the wards of Municipal Corporation, Panchkula; reserving of wards for the members belonging to the scheduled castes category as well as various other actions taken by the Government qua the Municipal Corporation, Panchkula.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that though vide notification dated 15.01.2026 (Annexure P-27) issued by the Government of Haryana, certain wards being wards No.07,16 & 17 were reserved for the members of the scheduled castes category but nothing has come on record to show that out of all the wards of the Municipal Corporation Panchkula, the said wards have the maximum population of scheduled castes as per the census of year 2011, which is the requirement envisaged under law governing said issue.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the respondents have reserved the said wards for the members belonging to scheduled castes category and while doing so, the State has relied upon the Family Information Data Repository, which is unlawful and wrong and therefore, the reservation of the wards for members of scheduled caste done vide Notification dated 15.01.2026 (Annexure P/27) is not correct and the respondents are liable to be directed to reconsider the said issue keeping in view the population data of all the wards as per the Census of year 2011 and thereafter, reserve the wards keeping in view which ward has the highest number of scheduled castes residing therein.

4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record with their able assistance.

5. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners was asked to point out any averment made in the writ petition that the wards which have been reserved for the members belonging to schedule castes vide Notification dated 15.01.2026 (Annexure P/27) do not have maximum population of the scheduled castes even as per the census of year 2011.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that no such data is available with them and rather the same will be available with the State and therefore, the State should be asked to clarify the said aspect.

7. The answer given by the learned counsel for the petitioners to the query raised by this Court shows that no relevant data is available with petitioners to back the argument raised that as per 2011 census, wards reserved for scheduled castes categorises do not have maximum population of scheduled castes and no such data has been brought before this Court to challenge the Notification dated 15.01.2026 (Annexure P/27) with the clear averment that reservation of wards for the members of scheduled castes category in the upcoming elections of the Municipal Corporation, Panchkula, has not been done appropriately. Rather the writ petition has been filed only on the apprehension of the petitioners which apprehension has no base to stand upon keeping in view the facts brought on record and placed before this Court. Till an act which is being attributed to the respondents being illegal is proved to be illegal on the basis of the data on record, this Court will not interfere in an election process.

8. Further, despite various opportunities given during the hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners has not been able to point out that the wards which have been reserved for the members of scheduled castes category vide Notification dated 15.01.2026 (Annexure P/27) is incorrect or the