Dhani Thakur And Others vs State Of H.P And Others

Vivek Singh Thakur, J

Present petition has been filed seeking direction either to transfer respondent No.6 or disassociate him from Panchayat Election process in

Development Block, Tissa, on the ground that he is inimical to the petitioners and by virtue of his post, if allowed to continue as such, he is in a position

to harm them in Panchayat Elections in various manners.

No notice was issued to respondent No.5 as Panchayat Elections have not been notified yet.

During pendency of the petition, learned counsel for petitioners under instructions has submitted that in case respondent No.6 is dis-associated from

the election process of the coming Panchayat Elections, petitioners would not be pressing their prayer to transfer him from Development Block, Tissa

to some other block, as petitioners are not raising any objection with respect to working of respondent No.6 in performance of other functions attached

to his post.

It is case of the petitioners that earlier respondent No.6 was serving in Police Department and at that time, for complaint made by the husband of

petitioner No.1, he was transferred and further that after appointment of respondent No.6 as Panchayat Inspector, his inclusion in Inspection

Committee of Panchayat of petitioner No.1 was opposed by the petitioner by filing CWP No. 3782 of 2019 and in that petition, acceding to the request

of petitioner No.1, State had excluded respondent No.6 from the said Inspection Committee, whereupon vide judgment dated 27.11.2019, petition filed

by petitioner No.1 was disposed of by a Division Bench of this Court on the basis of action of the State excluding respondent No.6 from the Inspection

Committee. It is further case of the petitioners that they along-with others have represented against respondent No.6 to Chief Election Commissioner

to the State of Himachal Pradesh with a copy thereof to District Election Officer Panchayat-cum- Deputy Commissioner, Chamba. In the aforesaid

facts and circumstances, it is apprehended by the petitioners that respondent No.6 may cause undue harm to the petitioners while performing duties

assigned to him during Panchayat Elections particularly performing duties related to the Panchayats of the petitioners.

Apprehension of the petitioners has been refuted by the State with submissions that in the inquiry conducted by the Inspection Committee,

wherefrom respondent No.6 was excluded, it has been found that petitioner had misused her post and has misappropriated the Government money

allocated for the development works in the Panchayat, therefore, a show cause notice under Section 145 (1) (c) of the H.P. Panchayati Raj Act, 1994

has been issued to her in July, 2019, wherein proceedings have been initiated against her but petitioner is trying to delay in finalization of those

proceedings. Further, husband of petitioner, who is also Zila Parishad Member of Chamba has been placed under suspension w.e.f. 03.08.2019 due to

framing of charges against him under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code, and therefore, he has been convicted in case FIR No. 63 of 2014 dated

22.04.2014 by the Sessions Judge, Chamba vide judgment dated 04.09.2019 in case titled as State of H.P Vs. Karam Chand and others.

Respondent No.6 has also contested the petition by filing detailed reply, wherein in addition to plea taken by respondent-State, it is stated that

respondent No.6 was never transferred on the basis of any complaint made by husband of petitioner No.1, rather he was promoted and posted in

routine.

Learned counsel for respondent No.6, has also submitted that though detailed reply to the petition has been filed on behalf of respondent No.6,

however, respondent No.6 has no personal interest to remain associated with the election process of Panchayats of the petitioners’. It was further

qualified on his behalf that he has performed and is performing his duties attached to the post without any bias.

In sequel to order passed by this Court during pendency of the petition, vide instructions dated 20.11.2020, it was informed that respondent No.6 is

not working at his home block and in view of ensuing Panchayat Elections, it would not be appropriate to dis-associate him from the election process,

which is already in full swing and thus it would not be possible to transfer respondent No.6, however, as per instructions dated 25th November, 2020, it

was informed that proposal to transfer respondent No.6 from Development Block, Tissa to Development Block, Bhattiyat has been submitted for

approval of the competent authority.

In view of submissions of learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioners are not objecting other working of respondent No.6 and are not

pressing their prayer for transfer of respondent No.6. The proposal of transfer of respondent No.6, in case mooted for pendency of present petition,

has lost its relevance and need not be considered.

Learned counsel for the petitioners, under instructions, and also on the basis of duties and responsibilities of the Panchayat Inspector notified in the

Rajpatra has contended that Panchayat Inspector has key role to play in Panchayat Elections by providing active assistance to Block Development

Officer in deputing Assistant Returning Officer, constitution of polling party, deputing polling party, handing over ballot papers to the polling party,

issuance of ‘No Objection Certificate’ to the candidates and preparation of paper seal on ballot box and also other works and duties assigned to

him during election process.

On 03.12.2020, considering submissions of learned Advocate General and counsel for private parties, learned Advocate General was directed to

have complete instructions with respect to the role of Panchayat Inspector in conducting election of a particular Panchayat and feasibility of assigning

that work, in present case, related to Panchayats of the petitioners, to any other officer equivalent, superior or subordinate to respondent No.6, so as to

indicate that respondent-State is keen to conduct free, fair and impartial election of Panchayati Raj Institutions.

Vide instructions dated 4 th December, 2020, it was further informed by and on behalf of Panchayati Raj Department that duty of Panchayat

Inspector is limited to the office of Development Block and he visits field in case of any inquiry so entrusted to him and Panchayat Inspector is neither

Assistant Returning Officer nor Returning Officer and his duty is to receive election material and to distribute it to the parties and also to impart

training regarding election to the parties concerned. Learned Advocate General further submits that Government is committed to conduct free, fair

and impartial elections to the Panchayati Raj Institutions at any cost.

Vide instructions dated 20th November, 2020, it was informed by the Department that it would not be appropriate to dis-associate respondent No.6

from the election process, whereas, vide instructions dated 4th December, 2020, it has been communicated that the Panchayat Inspector has a limited

role in conducting panchayat elections. Learned counsel for the petitioners has claimed otherwise.

In furtherance to instructions imparted by the Department particularly dated 04.12.2020 and also intention of the Government to conduct free, fair

and impartial Panchayat Elections as expressed by learned Advocate General, without adjudicating the merits of the allegations and counter-

allegations leveled by the parties to give a message that Government intends to conduct free, fair and impartial elections of Panchayati Raj Institutions,

it would be appropriate that respondent No.6 is not associated in affairs of conducting elections of Panchayats of the petitioners i.e. Gram Panchayat,

Sanwaal and Gram Panchayat, Shalela Bari, Development Block, Tissa, District Chamba, H.P. particularly with respect to assigning work of deputing

Assistant Returning Officer, constitution of polling party, deputing polling party, handing over ballot papers to the polling party, issuance of ‘No

Objection Certificate’ to the candidates and preparation of paper seal on ballot box and sealing of ballot boxes in the ensuing Panchayat elections.

Therefore, respondent-State is directed to act accordingly by not associating respondent No.6 in conducting ensuing elections of Panchayats of

petitioners, as observed supra.

At the cost of repetition, it is made clear that in present petition, claims and counter claims of parties have not been evaluated on merit but

submissions made on their behalf have been referred for completion of facts and thus any reference of pleadings, submissions and facts shall be

confined for adjudication of present petition.

The writ petition is disposed of in aforesaid terms, so also the pending application(s), if any.