AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge
The writ petition has been instituted alleging non-performance of statutory duties by respondent No.3 in not scheduling the meeting for election of Chairman and Vice-Chairman of Zila Parishad, Shimla. Pursuant to the orders passed in this writ petition, respondent No.3 has now proposed to fix such meeting on 10.09.2026. During hearing of the case, an ancillary issue concerning quorum of such meeting also arose. Learned counsel on both sides were accordingly heard on this legal issue as well.
The case:-2(i). Zila Parishad, Shimla consists of 25 elected territorial constituencies/seats. Elections to the aforesaid seats were held in May 2026. Results were declared on 31.05.2026. Petitioners, 13 in number alongwith 12 others, were declared elected from their respective Zila Parishad wards/ constituencies in District Shimla. Respondent No.3-the Deputy Commissioner Shimla (the competent authority) issued requisite notification/declaration, recognizing the petitioners and other 12 successful candidates (non-parties) as duly elected members of Zila Parishad, Shimla.
2(ii). On completion of the above electoral process, respondent No.3 exercising the statutory authority, issued an office communication/notice on 03.06.2026 in pursuance of Sections 90 & 127 of the Himachal Pradesh Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (in short ‘the Act’) and Rule 86 of the Himachal Pradesh Panchayati Raj (Election) Rules, 1994 (in short ‘the Rules’) to all the elected members of Zila Parishad Shimla, requiring them to participate in the meeting/oath ceremony fixed for 06.06.2026. The elected members of Zila Parishad, Shimla including the petitioners attended the meeting on 06.06.2026 and took the prescribed oath/affirmation of allegiance in accordance with the provisions of the Act and Rules framed thereunder. During the course of meeting on 06.06.2026, respondent No.3 did not call upon the elected members of Zila Parishad to elect its Chairman and Vice-Chairman.
2(iii). After about two weeks, respondent No.3 on 20.06.2026, issued an office communication/notice to the elected members of Zila Parishad, Shimla, intimating about ‘first meeting’ of Zila Parishad having been fixed for 27.06.2026; The elected members were called upon to attend the same. The said office communication/notice did not disclose the purpose, object or agenda of the meeting scheduled for 27.06.2026.
2(iv). It is an admitted position of the parties that only 11 elected members of Zila Parishad, Shimla attended the meeting convened on 27.06.2026. Petitioners did not attend the meeting. It is also not in dispute that the Deputy Commissioner himself did not preside over the meeting on 27.06.2026. It was the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Shimla, who presided over the meeting on the said date.
2(v). Respondent No.3 next issued an office communication/notice on 20.07.2026 to all the elected members of Zila Parishad, Shimla, informing them that another meeting of Zila Parishad had been scheduled for 03.08.2026. The office communication/notice dated 20.07.2026 was issued under Section 90 of the Act and Rule 86 of the Rules for election to the offices of Chairman and Vice-Chairman of Zila Parishad, Shimla. Pursuant to the aforesaid notice, meeting was convened on 03.08.2026. According to the petitioners, due to certain unavoidable and bonafide circumstances beyond their control, the same could not be attended by them.
2(vi). This writ petition was instituted on 10.08.2026 with the grievance that respondent No.3 has not convened the statutory meeting for conducting the elections to the offices of the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of Zila Parishad, Shimla in accordance with the provisions of the Act and Rules framed thereunder despite repeated requests of the petitioners.
2(vii). Following order was passed in this matter on 11.08.2026 while issuing notice to the respondents:-
“Notice. Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, learned Additional Advocate General and Mr. Siddhant Negi, learned counsel, appear and waive service of notice on behalf of respective respondents.
As per case set up, petitioners are elected members of Zila Parishad, District Shimla. They were elected as such in the elections to the State Panchayati Raj Institutions held in May, 2026. Their grievance is on account of alleged dereliction of the respondents in completing the statutory process of constitution and functioning of Zila Parishad, Shimla by not holding elections of its Chairman and Vice-Chairman.
Let learned Additional Advocate General to have instructions from respondent No.3 as to (i) why no meeting for election of Chairman and Vice-Chairman of Zila Parishad, Shimla was notified till 20.07.2026. (ii) Respondent No.3 to also place on record instructions with regard to next date of meeting for election of Chairman and Vice-Chairman of Zila Parishad, Shimla.
Respondent No.1 to place on record instructions with regard to compliance of decision rendered on 06.08.2026 in CWP No.11710/2026 (Ankush Indoria versus State Election Commission and others) and to fix the accountability of the Officer(s) responsible for not discharging their statutory duties. Reply be also filed by the next date.
List on 17.08.2026.”
The above order, apart from noticing the grievance of the petitioners concerning alleged dereliction of the respondents in completing the statutory process of constitution and functioning of Zila Parishad, Shimla by not holding elections of its Chairman and Vice-Chairman, also directed respondent No.3 to respond as to:- (i) Why no meeting for election of Chairman and Vice-Chairman of Zila Parishad, Shimla was notified till 20.07.2026; (ii) To also place on record instructions with regard to next date of meeting for election of Chairman and Vice-Chairman of Zila Parishad, Shimla. Respondent No.1 was directed to place on record instructions with regard to compliance of decision rendered on 06.08.2026 in CWP No.11710/2026 (Ankush Indoria versus State Election Commission and others) and to fix the accountability of the Officer(s) responsible for not discharging their statutory duties.
2(viii). Pursuant to above order, reply has been filed by respondent No.3. Separate instructions dated 17.08.2026 issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Shimla have also been placed on record by the learned Deputy Advocate General. Learned Deputy Advocate General also placed on record office letter dated 17.08.2026 from the Director-cum-Special Secretary (PR) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, issued with the approval of the Chief Secretary, Himachal Pradesh, circulating the judgment rendered in Ankush Indoria Versus State Election Commission and others2, to all the Deputy Commissioners, Sub-Divisional Magistrates and Block Development Officers in the respondent-State for information and strict compliance in letter & spirit with the observations and directions contained therein.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the case file.
3(i). Learned Advocate General submitted that there has been no dereliction of statutory duties on part of respondent No.3 in the instant case. Respondent No.3 could not convene the meeting of Zila Parishad for electing its Chairman and Vice-Chairman till 20.07.2026 on account of his preoccupation with administrative & protocol duties and also in view of process that had been started by the district administration for election of the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of 13 Panchayat Samitis across the district along with the elections of President and Vice-President of 10 Municipal Councils/Committees as tabulated in the reply. Last of these elections was concluded on 23.07.2026. Keeping in view that respondent No.3 was the authorized officer for the aforesaid elections as well, the meeting for holding the elections to the offices of the Chairman and Vice-Chairman, Zila Parishad, Shimla could be scheduled only for 03.08.2026 under office communication/notice dated 20.07.2026, which was adjourned for lack of quorum. Learned Advocate General also submitted that after 03.08.2026, respondent No.3 was occupied in making arrangements for Independence Day celebrations in the State Capital. On account of this, respondent No.3 could not convene the meeting of the elected members for election of Chairman and Vice-Chairman of Zila Parishad. In the interregnum, monsoon session of the State Legislative Assembly was declared w.e.f. 21.08.2026 upto 03.09.2026. 04.09.2026 being holiday on account of Janmashtami, followed by Saturday and Sunday, respondent No.3 has accordingly proposed to convene the next meeting for electing the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of Zila Parishad, Shimla on 10.09.2026.
Learned Advocate General further submitted that meeting of elected members of Zila Parishad scheduled for 06.06.2026 was only for the purpose of administering oath to the newly elected members. Next meeting of Zila Parishad that was ordered to be convened on 27.06.2026 under communication/notice dated 20.06.2026 was not for the purpose of electing its Chairman and Vice-Chairman. The said meeting was ordered to be convened in view of Government notification dated 06.06.2026 (copy thereof was produced during hearing of the case). The said notification was issued under Section 128(1) of the Act. The notification did not pertain to electing Chairman and Vice-Chairman of Zila Parishad. It was a special meeting that was ordered to be convened on 27.06.2026 under office communication/notice dated 20.06.2026. The aforesaid meeting cannot be construed to be the ‘first meeting’ towards electing Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Zila Parishad. The meeting for electing Chairman and Vice-Chairman of Zila Parishad was fixed for 03.08.2026 under office communication/notice dated 20.07.2026. Even this meeting, according to learned Advocate General, cannot be termed as ‘first meeting’ as the quorum was not complete on that day and the meeting was adjourned. Therefore, according to the learned Advocate General, provisions of Rule 86(4) of the Rules will not be attracted to the case.
3(ii). Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners has referred to several provisions from the Act and Rules to bring home the contention that by not convening timely meeting of the members of Zila Parishad for electing its Chairman and Vice-Chairman, respondent No.3 has been derelict in performing the statutory duties. Submissions were also made that meeting now proposed to be held on 10.09.2026 will be the third meeting scheduled for electing Chairman and Vice-Chairman of Zila Parishad and that being the position, Rule 86(4) of the Rules would get attracted. Accordingly, quorum for such meeting shall be the simple majority of total elected members.
Consideration:-4(i). Schedule of Meeting:-4(i)(a). In terms of Section 2(48) of the Act, ‘Zila Parishad’ means a Zila Parishad constituted under Section 89 of the Act. Chapter VI of the Act governs Zila Parishad. Sections 88 to 97 of the Act fall within the aforesaid chapter. Section 88 provides for establishment of Zila Parishad for each district. Section 89 provides for constitution of Zila Parishad. Section 90 of the Act is with the heading ‘Election of the Chairman and Vice-Chairman’. The section, being relevant, is extracted hereinafter:-
“90.Election of the Chairman and Vice-Chairman – (1) After the declaration of the results, the Deputy Commissioner shall, as soon as possible but not later than one week of such declaration, call under his presidentship a meeting of elected members of the Zila Parishad for the purposes of oath or affirmation or allegiance under section 127.
(2)Immediately after oath or affirmation of allegiance under section 127 is administered or made, the elected members of a Zila Parishad shall, in the prescribed manner, elect from amongst themselves one of its members to be the Chairman and another to be the Vice-Chairman of the Zila Parishad:
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.”
In terms of Section 90(1) of the Act, after the declaration of the results, the Deputy Commissioner shall, as soon as possible, but not later than one week of such declaration, call a meeting of elected members of the Zila Parishad for the purposes of oath or affirmation of allegiance under Section 127. At this stage, it would be appropriate to extract hereinafter Section 127 of the Act that governs administration of oath or affirmation of allegiance:-
“127.Oath or affirmation of allegiance – (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Oaths Act, 1969 (44 of 1969) no elected office bearer of a Panchayat shall enter upon his office, until he has, in the manner prescribed, taken oath or made affirmation of his allegiance in the form specified in Schedule-V.
(2)If any such person refuses to take or make such oath or affirmation, except on account of such disability for which permission of the prescribed authority is obtained, his election shall be deemed to be invalid and a fresh election shall take place. (3) No person whose election has been deemed to be invalid under this section shall be eligible for election as the member, Pradhan or Up-Pradhan of Gram Panchayat or the member, Chairman or Vice-Chairman of Panchayat Samiti or Zila Parishad, as the case may be, for a period of two years from the date on which he ought to have taken or made such oath or affirmation.”
Reverting back to Section 90 of the Act, Sub-section (2) thereof provides that ‘immediately’ after oath or affirmation of allegiance under Section 127, the elected members of a Zila Parishad shall, in the prescribed manner, elect from amongst themselves one of its members to be the Chairman and another to be the Vice-Chairman of the Zila Parishad. Reference to ‘prescribed manner’ is relatable to Rule 86 of the Rules that falls under Chapter X with the heading ‘Election of Chairman and Vice-Chairman of Zila Parishad’. Relevant portion of the Rule reads as under (as amended on 18.04.2026):-
“86.Meeting for election.-(1) After the declaration of result of the elected members of the Zila Parishad, the Deputy Commissioner concerned shall fix a date of meeting for the purpose of oath or the affirmation of allegiance under section 127 of the Act under his presidentship (hereinafter referred to as the Presiding Officer) as soon as possible but, not later than one week of such declaration as per section 90 of the Act.
(1-A) After oath or affirmation of allegiance under sub-rule (1) is administered or made, the Deputy Commissioner concerned 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 Zila Parishad:
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 chief executive officer and the Secretary of the Zila Parishad, authorized 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 beyond human control, it is not possible to hold such meeting within seven days, the government may allow such meeting to be held after seven days, but not later than thirty days after the occurrence of the vacancy in question.
(2)The Deputy Commissioner shall issue a notice to all the elected members in Form-40.
(3)A copy of such notice shall be exhibited on the notice board of the Zila Parishad office and office of the Deputy Commissioner………….”
According to Rule 86, after the declaration of result of the elected members of Zila Parishad, the Deputy Commissioner shall fix a date of meeting for the purpose of oath or affirmation of allegiance under Section 127 of the Act as soon as possible, but not later than one week of such declaration as per Section 90 of the Act.
This provision was followed by respondent No.3 in the instant case. Within one week of declaration of the result, vide office communication/notice dated 03.06.2026, the meeting was fixed for 06.06.2026 and oath was administered to elected members.
4(i)(b). In the given facts and circumstances, the reasons offered by respondent No.3 for not convening the meeting of the members of Zila Parishad, Shimla for electing its Chairman and Vice-Chairman up till 03.08.2026 on account of commencement of election process for the Chairman & Vice-Chairman of 13 different Panchayat Samitis and 10 Municipal Councils/Committees of the district and thereafter attributing the delay to preparation for Independence Day celebrations, Monsoon Session of State Assembly are nothing, but lame excuses. Even till date, respondent No.3 has not issued any office communication/notice for convening the meeting of the members of Zila Parishad, Shimla for electing its Chairman and Vice-Chairman. Elections of Chairman and Vice-Chairman of Zila Parishad, Shimla were as relevant as elections to other local bodies. Despite administering oath to the elected members of Zila Parishad on 06.06.2026, the meeting of elected members of Zila Parishad for electing its Chairman and Vice-Chairman was not scheduled till 03.08.2026. The callous and casual approach is nothing short of dereliction of statutory duties. The statute mandated respondent No.3 to ‘immediately’ call for meeting of elected members of Zila Parishad after administering oath to them to enable them to elect its Chairman and Vice-Chairman. Whether elected members opt to attend or remain absent from such meeting is an entirely different matter and entailing different consequences set out in the Act and the Rules framed thereunder. For not scheduling the meeting w.e.f. 04.08.2026 up till now, respondent No.3 has taken the defense of his busy schedule for Independency Day celebrations and Session of the State Legislature scheduled to be convened from 21.08.2026 to 03.09.2026. According to respondent No.3, on account of the monsoon session of Vidhan Sabha, there would be heavy surge in the administrative activities; His duties will increase manifold; There will be issues of maintenance of law and order; Conducting elections simultaneously with the assembly session risks diverting Executive Magistrates and security forces away from critical duties etc. The office instructions citing the aforesaid reasons, relevant to the context, are as under:-
“1.That as the state capital, Shimla experience a heavy surge in administrative activity during the Vidhan Sabha Session.
2.The District Magistrate directly oversees inter-agency coordination (Police, Vidhan Sabha Secretariat, Municipal Corporation, Health, PWD, Fire Services, etc.).
3.That high frequency of processions, political rallies, representations, and dharnas outside the Vidhan Sabha complex requires continuous on-field magistrate supervision.
4.That VIP movements (Cabinet Ministers, MLAs, protected dignitaries) demand real-time traffic management and emergency route adjustments.
5.That conducting elections simultaneously with the Assembly Session risks diverting necessary Executive Magistrates and security forces away from critical duties.
6.The proceedings of the Assembly Security Meeting indicate that the Deputy Commissioner, Shimla has the overall supervisory responsibility for maintaining law and order, traffic regulation and internal and external security arrangements during the Assembly Session. This requires continuous coordination and monitoring of the arrangements, particularly in view of the sensitive nature of the Assembly Session and the movement of the general public.
7.The Deputy Commissioner, Shimla is also required to ensure effective coordination and compliance with the directions issued by the Hon’ble Speaker regarding the prescribed security and access arrangements of the Assembly. This involves overall supervision of the arrangements and around the Assembly precincts and coordination with the concerned departmental representatives to ensure their proper implementation.”
The aforesaid office instructions give the impression as if respondent No.3 is apprehending serious law & order problem during proposed meeting of the members of Zila Parishad, Shimla for electing its Chairman and Vice-Chairman. What kind of law & order problem is visualized by respondent No.3 during holding of such proposed meeting is not decipherable from the pleadings. Whether any such situation presented itself during the previously called meetings, is not available from the record. Reasons for such apprehension are not discernible. In any case, it has to be observed that to ensure democratic functioning of one institution be the State Legislature or functioning of other local bodies, the functioning of other democratic institution cannot be derailed or delayed.
Respondent No.3’s justification for not holding elections for the offices of Chairman and Vice-Chairman on the projected ground that its hands are tied due to Assembly Session or were occupied with elections of other local bodies is unacceptable. State is under a constitutional and statutory obligation to ensure timely functioning of all democratic institutions. Its engagement in proceedings of the monsoon session of State Assembly or Independence Day celebrations etc. cannot absolve it of its constitutional and statutory duties & responsibilities towards other democratic bodies. Holding of elections is not a matter of mere administrative discretion; It is an essential feature of democratic governance. Once State is under an obligation to facilitate and conduct such elections, it must take all measures to discharge that obligation. The plea that authorities are busy with Monsoon Session or were busy with Independency Day celebration or were busy with election of other local bodies, cannot be used as shield to avoid or postpone its statutory responsibilities. State is expected to discharge all its obligations simultaneously and in accordance with law. It cannot selectively prioritize one duty while overlooking another, particularly when such inaction directly affects the functioning of an institution. Any administrative constraint must be addressed by making appropriate arrangements and allocating resources, rather than by leaving the institution in lurch without its elected office bearers.
Having observed above, since respondent No.3 has now proposed to convene the meeting of the members of Zila Parishad, Shimla for electing its Chairman & Vice-Chairman on 10.09.2026, the matter is left at that without making further comments.
4(ii). Quorum:-
In terms of Rule 86(1-A), as amended by the respondents under notification dated 18.04.2026 and published in the Rajpatra on 20.04.2026, after administering oath or affirmation of allegiance under Sub-Rule (1), the Deputy Commissioner concerned shall call a meeting of all elected members to elect Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Zila Parishad. Proviso thereto is to the effect that separate notices shall be issued for calling the meeting for oath of allegiance and the meeting for election of Chairman or Vice-Chairman. Sub-rule (4) of Rule 86, that was highlighted by learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners during hearing, reads as under:-
“86(4) 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 of the 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 adjourned 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 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. (5) 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.”
In terms of the above Rule, quorum is not required for 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 shall be two-third of the total of 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 would be convened. If second meeting is adjourned for want of quorum, the subsequent meetings shall be convened and action under Section 146(1)(b) shall be taken against those members who had not attended the subsequent meetings for which specific mention would be made in the notices of such meetings. The quorum for the second and subsequent meetings shall be the simple majority of the total elected members. Under Sub-Rule (5), notice shall be dispatched at least five days before the meeting as under:-
“86(5) 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.”
4(ii)(a). Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners, while highlighting dereliction of statutory duties by respondent No.3 in not convening meeting for electing Chairman and Vice-Chairman of Zila Parishad, Shimla, also urged that the meeting now proposed to be fixed by respondent No.3 on 10.09.2026 would be the meeting subsequent to the second meeting. The first meeting having been convened on 06.06.2026 for the purpose of election of Chairman and Vice-Chairman and second that was scheduled for 03.08.2026, therefore, in the meeting proposed for 10.09.2026, the quorum would be the simple majority of the total elected members and all those who do not attend the meeting are liable to face consequences in light of Rule 86(4), i.e. in terms of Section 146(1)(b).
Learned Advocate General contends that the meeting that has been proposed to be scheduled for 10.09.2026 would actually be the first meeting for the purpose of electing the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of Zila Parishad, Shimla. According to learned Advocate General, the meeting that was scheduled on 06.06.2026 was only for the purpose of administering oath to the elected members. It was on 03.08.2026 that meeting was specifically convened for electing the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of Zila Parishad. However, the quorum of this meeting was not complete as none of elected members attended the meeting. The meeting was adjourned. Therefore, the meeting that was scheduled on 03.08.2026 cannot be construed to be the first meeting. The meeting that is proposed to be convened for 10.09.2026 would be the first meeting in case it is attended by the elected members.
4(ii)(b). The submissions made by learned Advocate General cannot be countenanced. It would be in place to refer to the notice issued by respondent No.3 on 03.06.2026 under Sections 90 & 127 of the Act read with Rule 86 of the Rules for the declared purpose of scheduling the meeting of elected members of Zila Parishad, Shimla for 06.06.2026 for administering oath to them. Relevant portion thereof (in vernacular) is as under:-
“िहमाचल Ůदेश पंचायती राज अिधिनयम की धारा 90, 127 व िहमाचल लेने हेतु उपİ̾ थत होने की कृपा करŐ।”
The aforesaid office communication/notice dated 03.06.2026, though was issued under Section 90 read with Rule 86, however, it cannot be construed as the first meeting for the purpose of electing Chairman and Vice-Chairman of Zila Parishad. In terms of Rule 86 (1-A) of the Rules, separate notices are to be issued for calling the meeting for oath of allegiance and the meeting for election of Chairman or the Vice-Chairman. As noticed, the purpose avowed in the office communication/notice dated 03.06.2026 for convening the meeting of the members of Zila Parishad on 06.06.2026 was only to administer oath to them. Hence, the meeting convened on 06.06.2026 was not for the purpose of election of Chairman and Vice-Chairman of Zila Parishad, Shimla. The office communication/notice dated 20.06.2026 that scheduled the next meeting of the members of Zila Parishad on 27.06.2026 does not mention any object of the meeting. Hence, the meeting that was convened on 27.06.2026 also cannot be construed to be the meeting for the purpose of electing Chairman and Vice-Chairman of Zila Parishad. However, the meeting that was ordered to be convened on 03.08.2026 under office communication/notice dated 20.07.2026 was specifically for electing the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of Zila Parishad, Shimla. Relevant portion of this office communication (translation as supplied by the petitioners) is as under:-
“Sir/Madam,
With reference to the subject cited above, in pursuance of Rule 86 of the Himachal Pradesh Panchayati Raj (Election) Rules, 1994, I, Anupam Kashyap, IAS, Deputy Commissioner, District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh, do hereby inform that a meeting of the Zila Parishad, Shimla has been convened on 03.08.2026 at 11:00 A.M. at Bachat Bhawan, Office of the Deputy Commissioner, Shimla, for the election of the President and Vice-President of Zila Parishad, Shimla, under Section 90 of the Himachal Pradesh Panchayati Raj Act, 1994.
Therefore, all of you are requested to kindly remain present in the aforesaid scheduled meeting.
Sd/-
Anupam Kashyap, IAS
Deputy Commissioner District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh”
Place: Shimla
Dated: 20.07.2026
Merely because the meeting fixed for 03.08.2026 was not attended by the elected members and was adjourned, would not lead to construction that meeting was not scheduled on 03.08.2026. The contention of learned Advocate General that there had to be some presence of the elected members of Zila Parishad on the scheduled date to hold that it was indeed a meeting, wherein quorum was not complete and therefore, till the time the quorum of meeting was not complete, the meeting cannot be called to be the first meeting, is absolutely misconceived.
At the cost of brevity, Rule 86(4) of the Rules that provides for quorum for the meeting and consequence of non-availability of quorum during the meeting is extracted hereinafter:-
“86(4) 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 of the 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 adjourned 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 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.”
According to the above Rule:- 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 total of the elected members. If within two hours after the time appointed for the meeting, 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.
If the second meeting is also adjourned for want of quorum, subsequent meetings shall be convened and action in accordance with Section 146(1)(b) 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.
In terms of Rule 86(4), the first meeting even if adjourned for want of quorum, would still be treated as first meeting and the meeting that is convened after the adjournment of the first meeting for want of quorum, has been termed as the second meeting. Quorum for the second meeting is the simple majority of the total elected members.
Irrespective of the fact as to whether any elected member of the Zila Parishad attended the meeting or not, the meeting having been scheduled on 03.08.2026, that too, specifically for electing the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of Zila Parishad, has to be treated as the first meeting. Absence of any elected member of the Zila Parishad in the said scheduled meeting would not take away the character of that meeting and the purpose for which it was called. Any other interpretation would defeat the very object of Sub-Rule (4) of Rule 86 of the Rules. Further, with such interpretation, possibly no action can ever be taken against the members in case of their continued failure to attend the subsequent meeting.
In Ladhuram Versus Chief Panchayat Officer, Jaipur3, a Division Bench of Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court held that absence of quorum does not mean absence of meeting. Member cannot take the plea that his absence was inconsequential as there was no quorum. It would be in place to extract following para from the decision:-
“4.The second contention of Mr. Acharya is that in any case there was no quorum at the meetings from which the appellant is said to have absented himself. The learned counsel urges that if there was no quorum there could be no meeting and as such there was no absence from any meeting for which any disqualification could be attached to the appellant. Sec. 21(4) of the Act requires that one-third of the whole number of Panchas, including the Sarpanch, shall form the quorum for a meeting of the Panchayat. Admittedly the total number of members of this Panchayat was 9 in addition to the Sarpanch. Therefore, the quorum would be constituted of at least four members. It is not disputed that actually on the dates in question there was no quorum, and, therefore, the meetings could not be held or any business transacted. We, however, think that mere absence of quorum does not mean that there was no meeting, If a meeting is summoned for a particular date and the members concerned arrive to attend the meeting, the meeting evidently takes place, though no business can be transacted at the meeting for lack of quorum. In such cases usually the meeting has to be adjourned to some other date. It cannot be, therefore, argued that merely because there was no quorum, there could be no meeting at all, thereby dispensing with the presence of the members altogether. If this plea were available then every member could say that he need not attend a particular meeting and then it may inevitably lead to lack of quorum altogether. We think, therefore, that although the quorum could not be attained on the dates in question for continuing the normal transactions at those meetings, there were meetings of the Panchayat on the relevant dates and the absence cn those dates of the appellant would entail the disqualification imposed lby the law. There are of course no relevant rules framed on the point under the Act; but reference has been made to an analogous provision of the Rajasthan Town Municipalities Act, 1951, where under sec. 26(7) it is laid down that if less than one-third of the whole number of members be present at a meeting at any time from the beginning to the end thereof, the presiding authority shall, after waiting for not less than fifteen and not more than thirty minutes adjourn the meeting to such hour on the following or some other future day as he may reasonably fix. We need not refer to the other parts of the provision. It is quite clear, therefore, that even though there may be no quorum, there is a meeting; but for purposes of transacting business nothing can be done in the absence of a quorum. In our opinion, this point also does not bear scrutiny.”
Hence, the meeting that was scheduled to be convened on 03.08.2026 under office communication/ notice dated 20.07.2026, even if not attended on the scheduled date by the members, has to be construed as the first meeting. The next meeting proposed to be scheduled by respondent No.3 for 10.09.2026 would be the second meeting. Therefore, in terms of Sub-Rule (4) of Rule 86 of the Rules, quorum for the second and subsequent meetings would be the simple majority of the elected members. Further, respondent No.3 shall be authorized in accordance with the aforesaid Rules to take appropriate action against such of the members, who do not attend the meetings. Ordered accordingly.
In view of above discussion, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.3-the Deputy Commissioner, Shimla to take appropriate steps in accordance with law for issuing the requisite office communication/notice to convene the meeting of all the duly elected members of Zila Parishad, Shimla on 10.09.2026 for conducting election to the offices of Chairman and Vice-Chairman of Zila Parishad, Shimla. The meeting proposed to be convened on 10.09.2026 shall be treated as the second meeting for the aforesaid purpose, the first meeting being 03.08.2026. Consequently, procedure under Rule 86(4) of the Rules shall get attracted and govern the meeting.
Office of learned Advocate General is directed to circulate copy of this order, through the office of Chief Secretary, Government of Himachal Pradesh, to all concerned authorized officers dealing with elections to the Panchayati Raj Institutions forthwith with clear mandate that failing to comply with their statutory duty shall entail fixing of accountability on the concerned officers/officials.
The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.