Himachal Pradesh High Court
CWP/6409/2020 of ANURADHA KUMARI Vs STATE OF HP AND OTHERS on 31 December 2020
PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No.6409/2020 Decided on: 31.12.2020 Anuradha Kumari …Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others . ..Respondents.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
CWP No.6409/2020
Decided on: 31.12.2020
Anuradha Kumari
…Petitioner.
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh & others . ..Respondents.
……………………………………………………………………………
Coram
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge.Hon’ble Ms Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?[1]
For the petitioner : Mr. Subhash Mohan Snehi, Advocate.
For the respondents :Mr. Ashok Sharma, Advocate Generalwith Mr. Vinod Thakur, Mr. VikasRathore, Mr. Shiv Pal Manhans, Mr.Nand Lal Thakur, Additional AdvocatesGeneral, Mr. Bhupinder Thakur, Ms.Seema Sharma, & Mr. Yudhvir ThakurDeputyAdvocateGenerals,forrespondents/State.
(Through Video conferencing)
Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge (Oral)
The instant petition has been filed for grant of the following reliefs:- “1. That writ of mandamus may kindly be issued, directingthe respondents to include the name of the petitioner in the voterlist of Gram Panchayat Khashdhar, Ward No.8, TehsilChirgaon, District Shimla, H.P. so as to enable the petitioner tocase her vote and contest the election of Ward Member fromWard No.8, Gram Panchayat Khashdhar, Tehsil Chirgaon, 1Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
District Shimla, H.P., since the petitioner is permanent residentof the aforesaid Gram Panchayat.2.That writ of mandamus may kindly be issued, directingthe respondents to take action as warranted under the lawagainst the erring officers/officials for wrongly and illegallydeleting the name of the petitioner from the voter list.”
2. It is evident from the voter list that the same was published on 28[th] November, 2020. Yet the petitioner after finding her name to be conspicuously absence, did not initiateproceedings under Rule 24 of the Himachal Pradesh PanchayatiRaj Act (Election Rules 1994) within stipulated time, rather choseto file representation that to only on 28[th] December, 2020, whichwas beyond the period of limitation as prescribed under theaforesaid rule.
3. In such circumstances, when the petitioner hadalternative remedy and did not avail the same, the instantpetition is not maintainable and is dismissed accordingly. Theparties are left to bear their own costs. Pending application(s), ifany, shall also stand disposed of.
(Tarlok Singh Chauhan)Judge
December 31, 2020 (rohit)
(Jyotsna Rewal Dua)
Judge