Himachal Pradesh High Court
Ankush Indoria vs State Election Commission & Ors on 6 August, 2026
Author: Jyotsna Rewal Dua
Bench: Jyotsna Rewal Dua
2026:HHC:33065
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CWP No. 11710 of 2026
Decided on: August 06 , 2026
Ankush Indoria ...Petitioner
Versus
State Election Commission & Ors. ...Respondents
Coram:
Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge
Whether approved for reporting? Yes.
For the petitioner : Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Senior Advocate, with
Mr. Nand Lal Thakur and Mr. Ajay Sipahiya,
Advocates.
For the respondents : Mr. Surender Kumar Sharma, Senior Advocate
with Mr. Neeraj Sharma, Advocate, for
respondent No. 1- State Election Commission.
Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr.
L.N.Sharma, Addl. A.G. for respondents No. 2
& 3-State.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge
Elections to the State Panchayati Raj Institutions were
recently conducted by the respondents in May, 2026. Polling for
electing the Members of Panchayat Samiti, Indora, District Kangra
was also conducted. The counting of votes was completed on
31.05.2026. A total of twenty-six Members were declared elected to
2 2026:HHC:33065
the Panchayat Samiti, Indora. Petitioner is one of them. The
Prescribed Authority – Respondent No. 3/Sub-Divisional Officer
(Civil), Indora, District Kangra [in short ‘SDO(C)] issued a notice
under Rules 85/86 of the Himachal Pradesh Panchayati Raj
(Election) Rules, 1994 (in short the ‘Rules’) on 03.06.2026
conveying having scheduled meeting of Panchayat Samiti on
08.06.2026 under Section 79 of the Himachal Pradesh Panchayati
Raj Act, 1994 (in short the ‘Act’) for administering oath/affirmation of
allegiance to the elected members of the Panchayat Samiti. On the
scheduled date all twenty-six elected Members attended the meeting
and took oath.
Petitioner has filed this writ petition with the grievance that
election of Chairman and Vice-Chairman of Panchayat Samiti,
Indora has not been conducted till date; No date for conducting
election has been notified by respondent No. 3. Petitioner seeks
judicial review of inaction of the respondents and issuance of
appropriate directions for completion of statutory election process,
in accordance with law.
2. Notice of this writ petition was issued on 15.07.2026 when
grievance of the petitioner was noticed as under: –
“Notice. Mr. Sidhant Negi, learned counsel and Mr. Rajat
Choudhry, learned Assistant Advocate General, appear and waive
3 2026:HHC:33065
service of notice on behalf of respondent No.1 and respondents
No.2 & 3, respectively. Petitioner’s grievance is that the respondents,
in particular respondent No.3, is not discharging its statutory duties in
terms of the Himachal Pradesh Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 and the
Rules framed thereunder for conducting the elections to the offices of
Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson of Panchayat Samiti Indora,
District Kangra. That under the Rules, a specific timeline has been
prescribed for convening the elections to the aforesaid offices.
Let the needful be carried out by the respondents in
accordance with law by the next date.
Reply, if any, be also filed in the meanwhile.
List on 21.07.2026.”
The matter was adjourned on 21.07.2026 at the request
of the respondents-State. On the next date i.e. 31.07.2026,
respondent No. 3 filed reply.
Respondent No. 3 in his reply has primarily taken twofold
defence for having not convened meeting of the elected Members
of the Panchayat Samiti for election of Chairman and Vice-
Chairman viz. (i) Timeline of one week provided under Rule
85(1)(a) of the Rules for holding election of Chairman and Vice-
Chairman of the Panchayat Samiti has been omitted by notification
dated 18.04.2026; and (ii) Respondent No. 3 had received verbal
and written complaint concerning allegations of illegal monetary
inducements and attempt to influence election process to be
conducted for electing Chairman and Vice-Chairman. Reply pleads
that respondent No. 3 took immediate action upon the complaint in
4 2026:HHC:33065
order to safeguard the integrity of the election process as also to
ensure that election is conducted in a free, fair and transparent
manner; The written complaint was pending inquiry before the Sub
Divisional Police Officer, Indora (in short ‘SDPO, Indora’). During
pendency of the inquiry, respondent No. 3 did not deem it
appropriate to convene meeting of the elected Members of the
Panchayat Samiti for electing Chairman & Vice-Chairman. As per
reply “the matter is presently under inquiry before the SDPO Indora.
The action of the replying respondents has been bona fide, in
accordance with law, and aimed at safeguarding the integrity of the
democratic process”. … … “The replying respondents shall conduct
the election of the Chairman and Vice-Chairman in accordance with
law and the directions, immediately after the report is received from
SDPO Indora or order, if any, issued by this Hon’ble Court. It is,
emphatically denied that there has been any deliberate, arbitrary
and illegal inaction or unexplained postponement on the part of
respondent No. 3. The deferment of the election of Chairman and
Vice-Chairman is based on bona fide in the backdrop of serious and
widely publicized allegations of horse trading, use of money power
and attempts to influence the elected Panchayat Samiti members,
which required immediate attention and preliminary fact finding
5 2026:HHC:33065
before proceeding with the election, in order to safeguard the
integrity of the process”.
In view of the stand of respondent No. 3, vide order dated
31.07.2026, respondent No. 3 was directed to specify the authority of
law in exercise of which the meeting for election of Chairman and
Vice-Chairman had not been convened till date during pendency of the
inquiry statedly being conducted by SDOP, Indora. The matter
thereafter has been heard on the aforesaid legal question.
3. During hearing of the case, learned Advocate General
placed on record office instructions dated 03.08.2026 issued from the
office of respondent No. 3 which inter alia convey that inquiry was
concluded by the SDPO and report was made available on 22.07.2026;
Meeting of elected Members of the Panchayat Samiti has now been
fixed on 13.08.2026 for electing Chairman and Vice-Chairman of
Panchayat Samiti.
I have heard learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner,
learned Senior Counsel for the State Election Commission as also
learned Advocate General for the respondents-State on the limited
issue of competency of Authorized Officer-Respondent No. 3 in not
convening the meeting of elected Members of Panchayat Samiti for
electing its Chairman and Vice-Chairman on account of alleged written
complaint which was statedly pending inquiry before SDPO, Indora.
6 2026:HHC:33065
Learned Advocate General has defended the inaction of
respondent No. 3 for having not convened meeting of elected
Members of the Panchayat Samiti for electing Chairman and Vice-
Chairman of the Panchayat Samiti with the submissions that
respondent No. 3 is an Executive Magistrate; He has powers
under Section 14 of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
(in short ‘BNSS’); Respondent No. 3 has general executive
magistracy powers at sub divisional level; A complaint (appended
as Annexure R-III with reply which as per inquiry report is dated
15.07.2026) had been preferred by one Sh. Vajinder Pathania
before SDPO, Indora; A copy thereof was endorsed to the State
Election Commission, Deputy Commissioner, Kangra as also
SDO(C) Indora-respondent No.3; The complainant had alleged
attempts being made to influence election process through illegal
monetary inducements and corrupt practices; Respondent No. 3
acted bonafidely and in good faith. He took into consideration the
seriousness of the allegations. Such allegations of the complainant
– Sh. Vajinder Pathania if found to be ultimately true would have
had the potential to adversely affect the sanctity, fairness and
transparency of the electoral process. Respondent No. 3 as the
Executive Magistrate, empowered as such by Section 14 of BNSS
felt necessity of appropriate inquiry as also verification of factual
7 2026:HHC:33065
position to ensure that election process was conducted in a free, fair
and transparent manner. Learned Advocate General defended
respondent No. 3’s decision of not convening meeting of elected
Members of the Panchayat Samiti for electing its Chairman and
Vice-Chairman in view of Sections 31 to 34 of the BNSS which are
as under:-
“31. Public when to assist Magistrates and police. – Every
person is bound to assist a Magistrate or police officer reasonably
demanding his aid–
(a) in the taking or preventing the escape of any other person
whom such Magistrate or police officer is authorised to arrest;
or
(b) in the prevention or suppression of a breach of the peace;
or
(c) in the prevention of any injury attempted to be committed to
any public property.
32. Aid of person, other than police officer, executing warrant.-
When a warrant is directed to a person other than a police officer,
any other person may aid in the execution of such warrant, if the
person to whom the warrant is directed be near at hand and acting in
the execution of the warrant.
33. Public to give information of certain offences. – (1) Every
person, aware of the commission of, or of the intention of any other
person to commit, any offence punishable under any of the following
sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, namely:–
(i) sections 103 to 105 (both inclusive);
(ii) sections 111 to 113 (both inclusive);
(iii) sections 140 to 144 (both inclusive);
(iv) sections 147 to 154 (both inclusive) and section 158;
(v) sections 178 to 182 (both inclusive);
(vi) sections 189 and 191;
(vii) sections 274 to 280 (both inclusive);
8 2026:HHC:33065
(viii) section 307;
(ix) sections 309 to 312 (both inclusive);
(x) sub-section (5) of section 316;
(xi) sections 326 to 328 (both inclusive); and
(xii) sections 331 and 332,
Shall, in the absence of any reasonable excuse, the burden
of proving which excuse shall lie upon the person so aware, forthwith
give information to the nearest Magistrate or police officer of such
commission or intention.
(2) For the purposes of this section, the term “offence”
includes any act committed at any place out of India which would
constitute an offence if committed in India.
34. Duty of officers employed in connection with affairs of a
village to make certain report. – (1) Every officer employed in
connection with the affairs of a village and every person residing in a
village shall forthwith communicate to the nearest Magistrate or to
the officer in charge of the nearest police station, whichever is
nearer, any information which he may possess respecting–
(a) the permanent or temporary residence of any notorious
receiver or vendor of stolen property in or near such village;
(b) the resort to any place within, or the passage through,
such village of any person whom he knows, or reasonably suspects,
to be a robber, escaped convict or proclaimed offender;
(c) the commission of, or intention to commit, in or near
such village any non-bailable offence or any offence punishable
under section 189 and section 191 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023;
(d) the occurrence in or near such village of any sudden or
unnatural death or of any death under suspicious circumstances or
the discovery in or near such village of any corpse or part of a
corpse, in circumstances which lead to a reasonable suspicion that
such a death has occurred or the disappearance from such village of
any person in circumstances which lead to a reasonable suspicion
9 2026:HHC:33065
that a non-bailable offence has been committed in respect of such
person;
(e) the commission of, or intention to commit, at any place
out of India near such village any act which, if committed in India,
would be an offence punishable under any of the following sections
of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, namely, 103, 105, 111, 112,
113, 178 to 181 (both inclusive), 305, 307, 309 to 312 (both
inclusive), clauses (f) and (g) of section 326, 331 or 332;
(f) any matter likely to affect the maintenance of order or
the prevention of crime or the safety of person or property respecting
which the District Magistrate, by general or special order made with
the previous sanction of the State Government, has directed him to
communicate information.
(2) In this section,–
(i) “village” includes village lands;
(ii) the expression “proclaimed offender” includes any
person proclaimed as an offender by any Court or authority in any
territory in India to which this Sanhita does not extend, in respect of
any act which if committed in the territories to which this Sanhita
extends, would be an offence punishable under any of the offence
punishable with imprisonment for ten years or more or with
imprisonment for life or with death under the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023;
(iii) the words “officer employed in connection with the
affairs of the village” means a member of the panchayat of the village
and includes the headman and every officer or other person
appointed to perform any function connected with the administration
of the village.”
In the instructions dated 03.08.2026 placed on record by
respondent No. 3, apart from highlighting the above facts
concerning written complaint having been received by SDO(C),
10 2026:HHC:33065
Indora from one Sh. Vajinder Pathania and the inquiry being
conducted into the aforesaid complaint by SDPO, Indora and for
that reason having not convened till date the meeting of elected
Members of the Panchayat Samiti for electing its Chairman and
Vice-Chairman, purportedly in order to ensure holding of election
process in free, fair and transparent manner, has submitted that the
deferment of election was not intended to defeat or frustrate the
democratic process. It was administrative decision taken in
exceptional circumstances to preserve the integrity of the election
process. The office instructions also convey that inquiry conducted
by the SDPO, Indora was completed on 22.07.2026. In terms of the
inquiry report, no material evidence or facts were found to
substantiate allegations regarding horse trading, use of money
power or illegal inducement, in connection with the election of
Chairman and Vice-Chairman of Panchayat Samiti, Indora. No
cognizable offence was found to have been committed. The
allegations contained in the complaint were not substantiated. The
office instructions, as noticed earlier, convey that prescribed
authority has now fixed 13.08.2026 as the date for holding elections
of Chairman and Vice-Chairman of Panchayat Samiti, Indora.
Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner vehemently
contended that respondent No. 3 had no power under the Act or the
11 2026:HHC:33065
applicable Rules to defer elections of Chairman and Vice-Chairman
of Panchayat Samiti on the ground of a written complaint by Sh.
Vajinder Pathania having been received alleging corrupt practices
and pending inquiry of the foresaid complaint. Learned Senior
Counsel referred to the relevant provisions of the Act, Rules as also
the Constitution of India in support of his submissions.
4. Consideration
Since the legal question involved is the
jurisdiction/authority of respondent No. 3/prescribed officer to defer
elections of Chairman and Vice-Chairman of Panchayat Samiti that
too on professed ground of written apprehension of corrupt practices
that might be adopted in such elections of a complainant who
himself is not a Member of the Panchayat Samiti, it is imperative to
trace the legal framework.
4(i) Constitution of India
Part-IX of the Constitution of India is with the heading
“The Panchayats”. Article 243(d) defines ‘Panchayat’ as an
institution (by whatever name called) of self-government constituted
under Article 243B for rural areas.
ï‚· In terms of Article 243B (Constitution of Panchayats) “there
shall be constituted in every State, Panchayats at the village,
12 2026:HHC:33065
intermediate and district levels in accordance with the
provisions of this Part”.
ï‚· Article 243C (Composition of Panchayats) enables legislature
of a State to make provisions with regard to composition of
Panchayats as under:-
“243C. Composition of Panchayat. –
(1) Subject to the provisions of this Part, the Legislature of a
State may, by law, make provisions with respect to the
composition of Panchayats:
Provided that the ratio between the population of the
territorial area of a Panchayat at any level and the number of
seats in such Panchayat to be filled by election shall, so far as
practicable, be the same throughout the State.
(2) All the seats in a Panchayat shall be filled by persons
chosen by direct election from territorial constituencies in the
Panchayat area and, for this purpose, each Panchayat area shall
be divided into territorial constituencies in such manner that the
ratio between the population of each constituency and the number
of seats allotted to it shall, so far as practicable, be the same
throughout the Panchayat area.
(3) The Legislature of a State may, by law, provide for the
representation–
(a) of the Chairpersons of the Panchayats at the village level,
in the Panchayats at the intermediate level or, in the case
of a State not having Panchayats at the intermediate level,
in the Panchayats at the district level;
(b) of the Chairpersons of the Panchayats at the intermediate
level, in the Panchayats at the district level;
(c) of the members of the House of the People and the
members of the Legislative Assembly of the State
representing constituencies which comprise wholly or
13 2026:HHC:33065
partly a Panchayat area at a level other than the village
level, in such Panchayat;
(d) of the members of the Council of States and the members
of the Legislative Council of the State, where they are
registered as electors within–
(i) a Panchayat area at the intermediate level, in
Panchayat at the intermediate level;
(ii) a Panchayat area at the district level, in Panchayat at
the district level.
(4) The Chairperson of a Panchayat and other members of a
Panchayat whether or not chosen by direct election from territorial
constituencies in the Panchayat area shall have the right to vote in
the meetings of the Panchayats.
(5) The Chairperson of--
(a) a panchayat at the village level shall be elected in
such manner as the Legislature of a State may, by
law, provide; and
(b) a Panchayat at the intermediate level or district level
shall be elected by, and from amongst, the elected
members thereof.”
ï‚· Article 243-O bars interference by Courts in electoral matters
as under:-
“243-O Bar to interference by courts in electoral matters. –
Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution–
(a) the validity of any law relating to the delimitation of
constituencies or the allotment of seats to such
constituencies, made or purporting to be made under
article 243K, shall not be called in question in any court;
(b) no election to any Panchayat shall be called in question
except by an election petition presented to such authority
14 2026:HHC:33065
and in such manner as is provided for by or under any law
made by the Legislature of a State.”
4(ii) Himachal Pradesh Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 & Himachal
Pradesh Panchayat Raj (Election) Rules, 1994
To determine as to whether respondent No. 3 had power/
jurisdiction to defer the elections of Chairman and Vice-Chairman of
Panchayat Samiti awaiting outcome of the inquiry into a written
complaint; As to whether respondent No. 3 was authorized not to
convene meeting of elected Members of the Panchayat Samiti for
electing Chairman and Vice-Chairman on the cited ground of
seriousness of allegations levelled in the written complaint filed by
Sh. Vajinder Pathania, awaiting outcome of the inquiry being
conducted by SDPO, Indora, to ensure the sanctity, fairness of the
electoral process – apart from above Constitutional provisions, it
would be in place to refer to the relevant provisions of the Himachal
Pradesh Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 as also the Himachal Pradesh
Panchayat Raj (Election) Rules, 1994.
4(ii)(a) Section 77 of the Act provides for establishment of
Panchayat Samiti for each Block. Section 78 provides for
constitution of Panchayat Samiti. Section 79 pertains to election of
Chairman and Vice-Chairman of Panchayat Samiti. Being relevant
Section 79 of the Act is extracted hereinafter:-
15 2026:HHC:33065
“79. Election of Chairman and Vice-Chairman of Panchayat
Samiti.-
(1) After the declaration of result of election of the elected
members of the Panchayat Samiti in the prescribed manner, the
Deputy Commissioner concerned or any Gazetted Officer
appointed by him in this behalf shall as soon as possible but not
later than one week of such declaration call under his
Presidentship a meeting of all elected members for the purpose of
oath, or the affirmation of allegiance under section 127.
(2) Immediately after oath or affirmation of allegiance under
section 127 is administered or made, the elected members of a
Panchayat Samiti shall, in the prescribed manner, elect one of its
members to be the Chairman and another member to be the Vice-
Chairman of the Panchayat Samiti:
Provided that if the office of the Chairman or Vice-
Chairman, as the case may be, is vacated or falls vacant during
the tenure on account of death, resignation or no-confidence
motion, a fresh election within a period of two months from the
date of occurrence of vacancy shall be held from the same
category, in the prescribed manner.”
As per Section 79, immediately after oath or affirmation of allegiance
is administered, the elected Members of a Panchayat Samiti are to
elect in the prescribed manner one of its Members to be the
Chairman and another as Vice-Chairman of the Panchayat Samiti.
4(ii)(b) Chapter-IX of the Rules pertains to election of Chairman
and Vice-Chairman of Panchayat Samiti. Rule 85 thereof falling
under Chapter-IX is regarding ‘ meeting for election’ and reads as
under (relevant portion only):-
16 2026:HHC:33065
“85. Meeting for election.-
(1) After the declaration of results of the elected members of
the Panchayat Samiti, the Deputy Commissioner
concerned or any other officer authorised by him in this
behalf except Block Development and Panchayat Officer
shall fix a date of meeting under his presidentship
(hereinafter referred to as Presiding Officer) for the
purposes of oath or the affirmation of allegiance under
section 127 of the Act 3 as soon as possible, but not later
than one week of the declaration of results as per section
79 of the Act.
(1-A) After oath or affirmation of allegiance under sub-rule (1) is
administered or made, the Deputy Commissioner
concerned or any other officer authorized by him in this
behalf except Block Development Officer shall call under
his Presidentship a meeting of all elected members to elect
one of its members to be the Chairman and another
member to be the Vice-Chairman of the Panchayat Samiti:
Provided that separate notices shall be issued for calling
the meeting for oath of allegiance and the meeting for the
election of Chairman or the Vice Chairman.
(1-B) As soon as possible but not later than seven days after the
declaration of occurrence of the casual vacancy in the
office of the Chairman or the Vice-Chairman or both, as the
case may be, the Deputy Commissioner concerned or any
other officer, except the Secretary of the Panchayat Samiti,
authorised by him in this behalf shall call under his
presidentship a meeting of all elected members to elect the
Chairman or the Vice-Chairman or both, as the case may
be:
Provided that if, owing to a natural calamity of great
severity or a grave situation of law and order or a war or
aggression by another country against India affecting the
relevant area in Himachal Pradesh or any other cause
17 2026:HHC:33065beyond human control, it is not possible to hold such
meeting within seven days, the government may allow
such meetings to be held after seven days, but not later
than thirty days after the occurrence of the vacancy in
question.
(2) The Presiding Officer shall issue a notice to all the
members entitled to take part in the proceedings in Form-
40.
(3) A copy of such notice shall be exhibited on the notice
board of the Panchayat Samiti Office.
(4) The Notice shall be dispatched at least five days before
the date of meeting at their permanent address and shall
contain the date, time, place and purpose of the meeting.
(5) No quorum shall be required for the meeting for the
purpose of oath or affirmation of allegiance under sub-rule
(1). Quorum for the meeting for the purpose of election of
Chairman or Vice Chairman or both, as the case may be,
shall be two-third of the total elected members. If within
two hours after the time appointed for the meeting, the
quorum is not present, the meeting shall be adjourned. In
the event of adjournment of the first meeting for want of
quorum, the second meeting shall be convened and if the
second meeting is also adjourned for want of quorum, the
subsequent meetings shall be convened and action under
clause (b) of sub- section (1) of section 146 of the Act
shall be taken against those members who will not attend
subsequent meetings for which specific mention shall be
made in the notices of such meetings. Quorum for the
second and subsequent meetings shall be the simple
majority of the total elected members.” … …
Under the un-amended Rule 85(1-A) the authorized officer was to
convene the meeting of elected Members to elect Chairman and
Vice-Chairman “as soon as possible but not later than seven days”.
18 2026:HHC:33065
The words “as soon as possible but not later than seven days” have
been omitted vide notification dated 18.04.2026.
Learned Senior Counsel for the respondent-State Election
Commission submitted that the State Election Commission had
tendered its view to the respondent-State for incorporating some
reasonable timeline for convening the meeting of elected Members
for electing Chairman and Vice-Chairman; That the timeline should
not be left to uncertainty, however, its view was not reflected in the
notification issued by the State on 18.04.2026. Be that as it may,
there is no challenge to notification dated 18.04.2026 in this petition.
The fact remains that under Section 79 of the Act [reproduced in
para 4(ii)(a)], the mandate given to the authorized officer is to
“immediately after oath or affirmation of allegiance” hold meeting of
elected Members of the Panchayat Samiti to enable them to elect its
Chairman and Vice-Chairman. It appears that respondent No. 3 lost
sight of the aforesaid statutory duty he was to discharge. The words
‘immediately after oath or affirmation of allegiance’ in the parent
statute have been completely discarded by respondent No. 3 in his
overzeal over interpretation of notification dagted 18.04.2026
amending the Election Rules. The notification did not amend the
Statute.
19 2026:HHC:33065
4(ii)(c). The justification given by respondent No. 3-authorized
officer for not convening the meeting of elected Members to elect
Chairman and Vice-Chairman of Panchayat Samiti is wholly
misconceived. Respondent No. 3 had no such power vested in him
to defer the meeting of the elected Members of the Panchayat Samiti
awaiting outcome of the inquiry into allegations of apprehension of
corrupt practices levelled by Sh. Vajinder Pathania in his complaint.
It has not been disputed that complainant was not elected Member
of the Panchayat Samiti. It is also not in dispute that none of the
elected members of the Panchayat Samiti had submitted any
complaint whatsoever regarding alleged corrupt practices. Giving
unnecessary & undue weightage to a complaint of a person who
had no direct locus on the subject matter, in the given facts &
circumstances cannot be comprehended. Further, assuming that
there were allegations of apprehension of corrupt practices then also
it was not for respondent No. 3 to defer convening meeting of the
elected Members of the Panchayat Samiti as:-
(i) Under Section 162 of the Act (Election petition) “No
election under this Act shall be called in question
except by an election petition presented in accordance
wih the provisions of this chapter”.
20 2026:HHC:33065
(ii) Under Section 161 of the Act (Officers authorized to
hear election petitions) “The election petitions under this
Act shall be heard in the case of Gram Panchayats and
Panchayat Samities, by the Sub-Divisional Officer”; and
(iii) Section 163 of the Act provides manner of presentation
of petition. Any elector of a Panchayat may on
furnishing the prescribed security in the prescribed
manner, present within thirty days of the publication of
the result, on one or more of the grounds specified in
sub-section (1) of section 175, to the authorized officer
an election petition in writing against the election of any
person under this Act.
(iv) Section 175 delineates grounds for declaring elections
to be void. Adoption of corrupt practice by the elected
person or his agent or by any other person with the
consent of the elected person or his agent is one of the
grounds for declaring the elections as void. The
provision read as under:-
“175. Grounds for declaring election to be void.-
(1) If the authorized officer is of the opinion-
(a) that on the date of his election the elected person was not
qualified, or was disqualified to be elected under this Act;
or
21 2026:HHC:33065
(b) that any corrupt practice has been committed by the
elected person or his agent or by any other person with the
consent of the elected person or his agent; or
(c) that any nomination has been improperly rejected; or
(d) that the result of the election, in so far as it concerns the
elected person, has been materially affected-
(i) by the improper acceptance of any nomination, or
(ii) by the improper reception, refusal or rejection of any
vote or the reception of any vote which is void, or
(iii) by any non-compliance with the provisions of this Act
or of any rule made under this Act, the authorized
officer shall declare the election of the elected
persons to be void.
(2) Subject to the provisions of section 175-A, when an
election of an elected person has been declared to be void under
sub-section (1), a fresh election shall be held under the provisions
of this Act and the rules made thereunder.”
(v) As per Section 180 of the Act following shall be deemed
as corrupt practices:-
“180. Corrupt practices.- The following shall be deemed to be
corrupt practices for the purposes of this Chapter-
(1) Bribery, that is to say-
(A) any gift, offer or promise by candidate or his agent or by
any other person with the consent of a candidate or his agent
of any gratification, to any person whomsoever, with the
object, directly or indirectly of inducing-
(a) a person to stand or not to stand as, or to withdraw
from being a candidate at an election; or
(b) a elector of the Panchayat area to vote or refrain
from voting at an election; or as a reward to-
(i) a person for having so stood or not stood, or
for having withdrawn his candidature; or
22 2026:HHC:33065
(ii) an elector of the Panchayat area for having
voted or refrained from voting;
(B) the receipt of or agreement to receive any gratification,
whether as a motive or a reward-
(a) by a person for standing or not standing as, or for
withdrawing from being, a candidate; or
(b) by any person whomsoever for himself or any other
person for voting or refraining from voting, or inducing
or attempting to induce an elector of the Panchayat
area to vote or refrain from voting, or any candidate to
withdraw his candidature.
Explanation.- For the purposes of this clause, the term
“gratification” is not restricted to pecuniary gratification
or gratifications estimable in money and it includes all
forms of entertainment and all forms of employment for
reward but it does not include the payment of any
expenses bonafide incurred at, or, for the purpose of,
any election.
(2) Under influence, that is to say, any direct or indirect
interference or attempt to interfere on the part of the
candidate or his agent, or of any other person with the
consent of the candidate or his agent, with the free exercise
of any electoral right:
Provided that-
(a) without prejudice to the generality of the provisions of this
clause, any such person as is referred to therein who-
(i) threatens any candidate or a member of the Sabha, or
any person in whom a candidate or such member is
interested, with injury of any kind including social
ostracism and excommunication or expulsion from any
caste or community; or
(ii) induces or attempts to induce a candidate of an elector
of the Panchayat area to believe that he, or any person
in whom he is interested, will become or will be
rendered an object of divine displeasure or spiritual
censure;
23 2026:HHC:33065
shall be deemed to interfere with the free exercise
of the electoral right of such candidate or an elector of
the Panchayat area within the meaning of this clause;
(b) a declaration of public policy, or a promise of pubic action,
or the mere exercise of a legal right without intent to
interfere with an electoral right, shall not be deemed to be
interference within the meaning of this clause.
(3) The appeal by a candidate or his agent or by any other person
with the consent of a candidate or his agent to vote or refrain
from voting for any person on the ground of his religion, race,
caste, community or language or the use of, or appeal to
religious symbols or the use of, or appeal to, national symbols,
such as the national flag or the national emblem, for the
furtherance of the prospects of the election of that candidate or
for prejudicially affecting the election of any candidate.
(4) The promotion of or attempt to promote, feelings of enmity or
hatred between different classes of the citizens of India on
grounds of religion, race, caste, community or language, by a
candidate or his agent or any other person with the consent of
a candidate or his agent for the furtherance of the prospects of
the election of that candidate or for prejudicially affecting the
election of any candidate.
(5) The publication by a candidate or his agent or by any other
person, with the consent of a candidate or his agent, of any
statement of fact which is false and which he either believes to
be false or does not believe to be true, in relation to the
personal character or conduct of any candidate, or in relation
to the candidature or, withdrawal, of any candidate, being a
statement, reasonably, calculated to prejudice the prospects of
the candidates election.
(6) The hiring or procuring, whether on payment or otherwise, of
any vehicle by a candidate or his agent or by any other person
with the consent of a candidate or his agent, for the
conveyance of an elector of the Panchayat area (other than
24 2026:HHC:33065
the candidate himself, the members of his family or his agent)
to or from any polling station or a place fixed for the poll.
Explanation.- In this clause, the expression ‘vehicle’ means any
vehicle used or capable of being used for the purpose of road
transport, whether propelled by mechanical power for otherwise
and whether used for drawing other vehicles or otherwise.
(6-A) The incurring or authorising of expenditure in contravention
of section 121-A.
(7) The obtaining or procuring or abetting or attempting to obtain
or procure by a candidate or his agent, or by any other person
with the consent of a candidate or his agent, any assistance
(other than the giving of vote) for the furtherance of the
prospects of that candidate’s election, from any person in the
service of the Government, the Government of India or the
Government of any other State or a local authority.”
4(ii)(d) A conjoint reading of the above provisions leaves no
manner of doubt that election of Chairman and Vice-Chairman of
Panchayat Samiti should be held immediately after oath or
affirmation of allegiance of the elected Members of the Panchayat
Samiti and the same should not be delayed. Respondent No. 3-
authorized officer has no power to defer convening the meeting of
elected Members of the Panchayat Samiti for electing its Chairman
and Vice-Chairman more so on the ground of there being a written
complaint with allegations of apprehension of corrupt practices that
might be adopted in such election, from a person who was not the
elected Member. Such allegations are in fact the grounds for
declaring elections as void and are to be raised in the election
25 2026:HHC:33065
petition for questioning the election. Under the Act ‘any election’
inclusive of election of Chairman and Vice-Chairman of Panchayat
Samiti can be challenged only by means of preferring an election
petition. It would also be in place to refer to Chapter-XII of the Rules
that deals with ‘Election Disputes and Appeals’. Rule 93 thereof
clearly provides that ‘disputes relating to elections to Panchayats
shall be disposed of in accordance with the provisions of Chapter-
XI of the Act‘. Sections 159 to 183, relevant provisions whereof
have already been adverted to, fall under Chapter-XI of the Act.
4(iii) The submissions of learned Advocate General that
Sections 14 and 31 to 33 of BNSS vest power in the authorized
officer – respondent No. 3 to defer the elections of Chairman and
Vice-Chairman of the Panchayat Samiti are absolutely misplaced.
These provisions are neither attracted to the fact situation nor they
confer power on respondent No. 3-authorized officer to sit over the
mandate of specific statute i.e. Himachal Pradesh Panchayati Raj
Act, 1994 and Himachal Pradesh Panchayati Raj (Election) Rules,
1994 framed there under as also the Constitutional embargo placed
under Article 243-O that debars even Courts from interfering in
electoral matters. The inaction of respondent No. 3 in not convening
meeting of elected Members of Panchayat Samiti, Indora for
electing its Chairman and Vice-Chairman virtually amounts to an
26 2026:HHC:33065
action for thwarting the functioning of a democratically elected
institution by not letting the electors of Panchayat Samiti Indora to
elect its Chairman and Vice-Chairman. Respondent No. 3 has
defeated the statutory object & purpose by not ordering convening
of meeting of elected Members immediately after their oath for
electing Chairman and Vice-Chairman. Respondent No.3’s action is
virtually antithetical to the democratic set up of the local self
governance. Executive powers of respondent No. 3 is subservient
to the Constitution of India, the Himachal Pradesh Panchayati Raj
Act, 1994 and the Himachal Pradesh Panchayati Raj (Election)
Rules, 1994 framed there under.
5. Respondent No. 3/Sub Divisional Magistrate’s action in the
professed capacity of Executive Magistrate, to halt the election of
Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Panchayat Samiti, Indora on the
ground of alleged apprehensions of electoral irregularities or
malpractices being inquired into by the concerned Sub Divisional
Police Officer is wholly untenable, manifestly illegal and contrary to
rule of law. Such action lacks statutory backing. It exceeds the
power conferred upon him as an Executive Magistrate and
transgresses the constitutional mandate. In a democratic set up,
such executive interference in the electoral process cannot be
countenanced. Preventing holding of elections of Chairman and
27 2026:HHC:33065
Vice-Chairman not only impedes functioning of Panchayat Samiti but
also undermines the will of the electorate. Acts of this nature cloaked
with executive authority carry the imprint of authoritarianism and
are antithetical to the spirit of democracy. The democratic ethos
enshrined in the Constitution demand that elected institutions be
allowed to function without unwarranted executive obstruction and
respect for mandate of the people. In a case where a complaint
concerning electoral irregularities arises and the governing law
itself provides specific remedial framework as also the procedure for
adjudication, it is mandatory to address grievances relating to the
conduct or validity of elections through prescribed statutory
mechanism and not through executive fiat.
Taking note of the fact that during the pendency of the writ
petition, respondent No. 3 has now scheduled meeting of the elected
Members of the Panchayat Samiti, Indora on 13.08.2026 for electing
its Chairman and Vice-Chairman, the matter is left at that. Let this
meeting be convened in accordance with law. Office of learned
Advocate General is directed to circulate copy of this order through
the office of Chief Secretary to all concerned authorized officers
dealing with elections to the Panchayati Raj Institutions forthwith.
28 2026:HHC:33065
Petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid
observations. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, to also
stand disposed of.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua,
Judge
August 06 , 2026 (PK)
