CWP/6367/2020 on 30 December 2020

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.

CWP No. 6367 of 2020

Decided on: 30.12.2020 Surjeet Kumar

…Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors.

…Respondents

Coram:

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge. Hon’ble Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 No. For the Petitioner : Mr. Arush Matlotia, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Ashok Sharma, Advocate General with Mr. Vinod Thakur, Mr. Shiv Pal Manhans, Addl. A.Gs., Ms. Seema Sharma, Mr. Bhupinder Thakur and Mr. Yudhvir Singh Thakur, Dy. A.Gs., for respondents-State. Mr. Ajeet Saklani, Advocate, for the State Election Commission. Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge (Oral) The instant petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive reliefs:-

(i) That a writ in the nature of Certiorari may kindly be issued and quashed the notification dated 21st December, 2020 (Annexure P-1) to the extent that for the Election Programme for Panchayats of Block Bharmour and Mehla. 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes

(ii) That a writ in the nature of Mandamus may very kindly be issued directing the respondent No. 3 to re-think and fixed any other date for Panchayat elections/Block Samiti elections keeping in view the adverse weather conditions.

2. The petitioner is a resident of Gram Panchayat Aura Phati. He claims to be aggrieved by the Notification dated 21.12.2020 to the extent it pertains to the holding of elections for Panchayats under Block Bharmour and Mehla.

3. The main ground for assailing the notification is that the respondents while issuing notification have not taken into consideration the climatic conditions prevailing in the areas in question, where due to adverse weather conditions (rain and snow) electric polls would be damaged and because of which there would be every chance of the counting of the ballot papers being disrupted.

4. Additionally, it is averred that due to adverse conditions the people/voters may not come out to exercise the right to vote and in this manner, the respondents have indirectly snatched away the right of the voters to participate in election process.

5. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, we are clearly of the view that the instant is misconceived and is liable to be dismissed.

6. It is not in dispute that there are 12 Districts in Himachal Pradesh, barring only three Districts i.e. Una, Hamirpur and Bilaspur, the other Districts receive light, moderate, heavy and very heavy snowfall.

7. It would further be noticed that as regards the areas which receive very heavy snowfall, the elections in those areas have been ordered to be held in June, 2021. Whereas, in the areas, which receive light and moderate snowfall, the elections have been ordered to be held in January, 2021.

8. As a matter of fact, even for Chamba District, the development Block Pangi, which receives very heavy snowfall, the elections have been ordered to be held in June, 2021, while for the remaining development Block including Bharmour and Mehla, the elections have been ordered to be held in January, 2021.

9. Normally, it is the sole prerogative and within the exclusive domain of the State to hold or not and when to hold elections and it, therefore, cannot be held that the

State has not taken into consideration the relevant factors including the weather conditions and currently the on-going COVID-19 pandemic.

10. At a last ditch effort, the learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that legal formulation cannot be enforced divorced from the realities of the fact situation of the case and would place reliance on the learned Division Bench judgment authored by one of us (Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J.) in CWP No. 975 of 2017, titled as Raju Thakur vs. State Election Commission & Ors., decided on 29.05.2017, the relevant portion whereof reads as under:-

56. It is more than settled that legal formulations cannot be enforced divorced from the realities of the fact situation of the case. Situations without precedent demand remedies without precedent. The extra-ordinary situation may call for extra-ordinary response and situational demands. We really fail to understand how the aforesaid observations support the contention of the petitioner.

11. As already observed above, we have no doubt in our mind that the State while taking the decision to conduct elections, would have kept all the factors including the weather condition, COVID—19 pandemic condition etc. at the time of issuing the notification for election process.

12. Therefore, in the given circumstances, we have no doubt in our mind that the instant petition is nothing but a publicity oriented petition and since the petition has been filed only by a single individual, we can conveniently hold that the opinion of the petitioner does not essentially/necessarily reflect the opinion or desire of the majority of the people residing in the areas in question.

13. Consequently, we find no merit in this petition and the same is accordingly dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. Parties are left to bear their own costs. (Tarlok Singh Chauhan)

Judge (Jyotsna Rewal Dua) 30th December, 2020. Judge (sanjeev)