Kehar Singh Rana v. State Of Haryana And Others
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH CWP-23273-2022 (O&M) Date of decision :21.02.2024 KEHAR SINGH RANA
...Petitioner
Versus
THE STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSH BUNGER Present :
Mr. Govind Chauhan, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Naveen S. Bhardwaj, Addl. A.G., Haryana.
HARSH BUNGER, J. (ORAL)
! "# $ %& %
' ()* + " )* , - *" #
+. ) / ) 0 -) , *" / - * / . 1 * *23 " &&4 * ) - $ % % %
' ( )* + 0 )*
-/)* " ) 2
*" - 6
# "5# "7 ) *
9 , - * # " ) )* ,/ - / 1 * *2"&&4
: &&4; < ! - / & &&4 3 " &&40 + 7 , " 7/- * 7 - " * %& %
-# / / 7 %& %
' (" 44, - * 5# 5# , - * 5#" 5# - <%<.= 8 " ) "< /) / 5# 4 - ) / )* " +& " >(
!"
#
$ %&!
'
#
( !"
)
%&!
'
$ *+
,-
-
- . &
$
&! !"
!
&/"
- % &! $ *+ ,-
#
. #
(
!
&/"
2
- %&! 3
- 4
2 #
(
$ *+ ,- %&!
!
5
( - *+ ,-
6
#
#
7
$ *+
,-
.
#
#
3
9 #
. 3 5 ( -
. 8
#
#
#
!:
#
.
, (%1
3 9
)-
5 ( -
*+
#
. 8
3
5 ( - #
#
- 8
5 ( -
#
(
5 ( - *+
5 -
- #
#
%
&
-
, (%
%
&
5 ( -
* (
#
#
5 ( - (
#
# :
. ! / ( "
" - ) / %4% %
" )* 5 )*
+ )- )* *" ( )- )* -) 2)* + / % % %
' (
In the present writ petition, a perusal of the order sheet would show that no formal notice of motion was issued; however, learned State counsel had sought time to file status report, which was filed on 10.11.2022 and the matter was listed for final arguments. The relevant extract of status report reads as under :- "3.
That reservation of seats of Scheduled Caste Sarpanch in block Siwan, District Kaithal was done in accordance with the provision of Section 9 of the Act of 1994 read with Rule 6 of Haryana Panchayati Raj Election Rules 1994 and as per the order of Director General vide letter no.DPH/ECA-2/117/2022 on dated 21/09/2022 which is annexed in the writ petition as Annexure (P-1). Reservation of offices of Sarpanches for Scheduled Castes have been made amongst the gram panchayats first having the largest maximum population of Scheduled Castes according to census 2011 and having been reserved earlier least number of time for Scheduled Castes after excluding the Gram Panchayats having 10% or less than 10% of Scheduled Castes population. The amended section 9(6) of Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 is reproduced as under. 4.
That as per record in the block Siwan 13 panchayats have to be reserved for the Scheduled Castes and 4
panchayats since the year 1994, till date, have not been reserved for the Scheduled Castes and their population is more than 10%. In addition to this, there are 9 such panchayats which have been reserved for the scheduled castes from 1994, till today, for only one time and in the same, the population percentage of the scheduled castes is the maximum. Gram Panchayat Kakheri has also been reserved only for 1 time and the population of the scheduled castes in it is 23.76%. Gram Panchayat Kakheri is included in the said 9 Panchayats in which the population percentage of the scheduled castes is between 23.76% to 38.84% and they have been reserved only for one time. That as per record and order of Director General, Development and Panchayat Department, Haryana, Chandigarh, there are total 44 Gram Panchayats in block Siwan, District Kaithal and the details of gram panchayats excluding 11, the gram panchayats having 10% or less than 10% population is given as under :- Sr.
No.
No. of times, the GP remained reserved for SC Sarpanch Percentage of Scheduled caste Population in the GP Andahli 17.25 Name of GP Total Populati on Scheduled Caste Population Atela 30.77 Dharampura 95.85 Dohar 19.07 Farsgnazra 28.33 Gogh 15.09 Gohra 38.84 Harnola 19.26 Janedpur 40.24 Kachi Pisol 43.64 Kakheri 23.76 Kakrala Kuchiyan 18.37 Kakyor Mazra 10.37
Kanthali 53.06 Kasour 20.36 Kawartaran 28.73 Kheri Gulamali 18.54 Kharaka 56.45 Ladana Chaku 29.31 Landekima 10.52 Malikpur 27.44 Nagal 57.51 Pahadpur 85.92 Papsar 17.61 Parbhawat 25.67 Pishol 28.88 Ramthali 15.72 Rasulpur 35.06 Sair 19.84 Sotha 13.17 Tarawali 68.52 Theh Kharak 10.91 Urlana 59.05 5.
That as per record and order of Director General, Development and Panchayat Department, Haryana, Chandigarh, the details of 13 Gram Panchayats are required to be reserved for Scheduled castes Sarpanch in accordance under Rule 6 of Haryana Panchayati Raj Election Rules, 1994. The following Gram Panchayat having been reserved least number of times so far and having maximum percentage of Scheduled Castes population and here by reserved for Scheduled castes Sarpanch. The list of 13 Gram Panchayat who are having the highest
population of scheduled castes have been reserved for scheduled castes Sarpanches.
Sr.
No.
Number of times, The GP remained reserved for SC Sarpanch Name of Gram Panchayat Total Population Scheduled Caste Population Percentage of Scheduled Caste population in the Gram panchayat Gogh 15.09 Theh Kharak 10.91 Lenderkima 10.52 Kakyormajra 10.37 Gohra 38.84 Rasulpur 35.06 Atela 30.77 Ladana Chakku 29.31 Kawaratan 28.73 Fareshmajra 28.33 Malikpur 27.44 Parbhawat 25.67 Kakeheri 23.76 6.
That against the order of reservation of Director General Development & Panchayat Department Haryana dated 21.09.2022 the petitioner earlier filed CWP No.23185 of 2022 before the Honble High Court titled as Kehar Singh Rana V/s State of Haryana & others which was disposed off vide order dated 04.10.2022 with a direction to Respondent no.2-Director General Development & Panchayat Department, Haryana to
consider and decide the representation dated 29-09-2022 (Annexure P-6) (marked to the Deputy Commissioner, Kaithal) expeditiously in accordance with law by passing speaking order on 06.10.2022.
7.
That in compliance of the direction of Hon'ble High Court, respondent No.2-Director General Development & Panchayat Department, Haryana decided the representation of the petitioner on merits and order dated 21.09.2022 has been rightly passed vide order dated 06.10.2022 which is annexed in the writ petition as annexure (P-7).
8.
That as the question regarding gram panchayat Kachi Pisol not having been reserved earlier is concerned as per the record of Gram Panchayat Block Siwan, the Gram Panchayat Kachi Pissol, which was earlier a part of Gram Panchayat Pissol and Gram Panchayat Pissol was reserved two times in the year 1995 & 2010. In this manner Kachi Pisol has also been considered to be reserved two times for the Scheduled Castes.
9.
That as per the order of Director General Development & Panchayat Department Haryana and as per record in Gram Panchayat Kakarla Anayat the population of Scheduled Castes is 10.24% and the claim that it has not been reserved even once is not appropriate as per census 2011. Earlier Gram Panchayat Kakrala Anayat comprised of two village i.e. village Kakrala Anayat and Kakrala Kuchiyan the total population of Gram Panchayat Kakrala Anayat is 2090 and the population of Scheduled Castes is 214 in this the Abadi of two Gram Panchayats i.e. Gram Panchayat Kakrala Anayaat and Gram Panchayat Kakrala Kuchian is included. After bifurcation in the Gram Panchayat Kakrala Anayat in the year 2004 vide order dated 29-09-2004 and two Gram Panchayats namely Kakrala Anayat and Kakrala Kuchiya were formed. As per record, the total population of Gram Panchayat Kakrala Anayat is 1110 and Scheduled Castes population is 34 the percentage of Scheduled Castes is only 3.06 and in this manner
the population of Scheduled Castes is less than 10% and due to that reason the same cannot be reserved. The remaining population is of Gram Panchayat Kakrala Kuchian, the percentage of Scheduled Castes is 18.37 and the population of Scheduled Caste is 180. Thereby this panchayat has been reserved once but the population of Scheduled Castes of Gram Panchayat Kakeheri is 23.76 percent and in this manner therefore Gram Panchayat Kakeheri is reserved for the Scheduled Castes.
10.
That as per the report of District Revenue Officer, Kaithal vide letter no.8308 dated 13.10.2022 the hadbust number
(69) of Kakrala Anayat & Kakrala Kuchian is the same according to the census of 2011 both the villages have been treated as one census unit and census is conducted on the basis of hadbust number (69), which is annexed with annexure (R-1). The Gram Panchayat of Kakrala Anayat is bifurcated by the order of Development & Panchayat Department Haryana Government on dated 29.09.2004. As per the wardbandi of Gram Panchayat Siwan on dated 17-04-2015, the total population of Kakrala Anayat is 1110 and population of scheduled caste is 34 and the total population of Kakrala Kuchiya is 980 and population of Scheduled Caste is 180. Thus the order passed by the authority concerned are legal and correct and based upon the provisions of law. It is therefore, respectfully prayed that in view of submission in the present status report, the writ petition filed by the petitioner may kindly be dismissed being devoid of merits.
11.
That as per notification no.SEC/4E-II/2022/3064 dated 07-10-2022 of State Election Commission Haryana polling of Election held on 02.11.2022 under rule 24(2)(vi) in Gram Panchayats, in block Siwan, District Kaithal and the Sarpanch has been elected for the Gram Panchayat concerned." A perusal of the above extracted status report would show that as per notification no. SEC/4E-II/2022/3064 dated 07.10.2022 of the State
Election Commission, Haryana polling of election held on 02.11.2022 under rule 24(2)(vi) in Gram Panchayats, in block Siwan, District Kaithal and the Sarpanch has been elected for the Gram Panchayat concerned. 7.
Apparently, the scheme regarding reservation of the office of sarpanch for the Scheduled Castes in the Gram Panchayats within a block and the rotation thereof to different Gram Panchayats; is a complex process, which is discernible not only from the contents of the writ petition, but would also be apparent from the status report. The question arises if upon consideration of the respective claims of the parties, any adjustment is required to be made as regards reservation of the office of sarpanch for the Scheduled Castes in a particular Gram Panchayat within a block and/or as regards the rotation thereof to different Gram Panchayats. However, keeping in view the fact that the polling of election has already been held on 02.11.2022 in Gram Panchayats in block Siwan, District Kaithal and the Sarpanch has been elected for the Gram Panchayat concerned, any such adjustment would create an imbalance in the seats to be reserved as regards the office of sarpanch for the Scheduled Castes in the Gram Panchayats within a block.
8.
Evidently, no interim relief/stay was granted in the instant petition as regards holding of elections of the block concerned. 9.
The fact remains that there is no challenge to the validity of the provisions contained in the 1994 Act and also the Election Rules, framed thereunder. Further, the scheduled elections have already been held on 02.11.2022 as regards the Gram Panchayats in Block Siwan, District Kaithal and the Sarpanches have been elected for the Gram Panchayats concerned. There is no challenge to the elections of the other Gram Panchayats within
the Block Siwan nor there is any interim direction/order, indicating that the elections to the other Gram Panchayats within the Block Siwan, would be subject to the final outcome of the present petition. Resultantly, no effective relief can be granted to the petitioner and at the cost of repetition, it is added that any attempt to change the reservation of the Office of the Sarpanch for the Scheduled Castes in the Gram Panchayat within a block and/or any rotation thereof to different Gram Panchayats within the block, shall upset the entire election process, which already stands concluded. 10.
A somewhat similar issue was considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Arun S/o Shankar Dokhe v. State of Maharashtra, 2017(13) SCC 500, wherein, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under:- "4. We have heard the counsel for both sides at length. During the hearing, it was noticed that the scheme regarding rotation of seats reserved for women or backward class of citizens etc., is a very complex process. That is discernible from the relevant provisions regarding allotment and rotation of seats reserved for women. We are of the considered opinion that even if the Petitioners succeed in persuading us on merits, as the election process of phase one has concluded with declaration of results in respect of other Electoral Divisions, the same cannot be undermined. Any attempt to make adjustment even in respect of one constituency i.e.
Electoral Division No.20 (Chande-Kasare), would create an imbalance in the ratio of seats to be reserved for the respective categories as mandated by the provisions of the 1961 Act and the 1996 Rules.
Rules provides for allocation of seats by drawing of lots. There appears to be some confusion if not conflict in the case of reconciling the mandate of reservation of seats for women in terms of Section 12(2) (d) and reservation of seats for women in reserved categories in terms of the Rules. The fact remains that the validity of provisions contained in the 1996 Rules has not been challenged in the writ petition. Further, the election schedule notified on 11.01.2017 by the State Election Commission has proceeded to its logical end in respect of all other Electoral Divisions of the concerned Zilla Parishad/Panchayat Samitis. There is no challenge to those elections nor those elections have been made subject to the outcome of the present Special Leave Petition. As a result, no effective relief can be granted to the petitioners.
5. As aforesaid, any attempt to do so would inevitably upset the ratio of reservation of seats for women in the other Electoral Divisions where the election process is complete. In other words, accepting the Petitioners' prayer in the writ petition at this stage would result in creating an imbalance in that ratio, which will be in violation of the letter and spirit of the law. For that reason, we decline to interfere in this petition and leave it open to the Petitioners to pursue any other remedy as may be permissible by law. The same will have to be decided in accordance with law. We make it clear that in the peculiar facts of the case on hand, we do not intend to express any view on the correctness of the issue canvassed before us by either side and we leave all questions open..."
11.
Keeping in view the afore-mentioned facts and circumstances, we decline to interfere in this petition. However, we leave it open to the petitioner to pursue any other remedy as may be permissible to him under law, which will have to be decided in accordance with law. It is clarified that
we have not expressed any view on the correctness of the stand taken by the respective parties and all questions are left open. 12.
Accordingly, the instant petition stands disposed of. 13.
All pending application/s, if any, shall also stand disposed of. (SUDHIR SINGH) (HARSH BUNGER) JUDGE JUDGE February 21, 2024 gurpreet Whether speaking/reasoned:
Yes/No Whether reportable:
Yes/No