HP Advocate General Challenges Court's Panchayat Poll Timeline Interpretation

Himachal Pradesh Advocate General Anup Kumar Rattan has stated that the High Court's interpretation of orders mandating Panchayati Raj elections by April 30 is incorrect according to constitutional and state law. He explained the delay was due to pending delimitation appeals and a separate petition, requiring time for proper objection hearings. The government had sought time until early 2026 to complete the reservation roster and final publication, but the court granted only four days for remaining formalities. Rattan emphasized the state's commitment to elections but indicated the legal interpretation of timelines may be challenged through further remedies.

Key Points: HP AG Questions Court Order on Panchayat Election Timeline

  • AG says court misinterpreted election timeline
  • Cites Article 243E & HP Panchayati Raj Act
  • Process delayed by delimitation appeals
  • State sought time until 2026 for proper procedure
3 min read

Interpretation of court orders not correct under Article 243E: HP Advocate General on Panchayati Raj Polls

Himachal Pradesh AG Anup Kumar Rattan says court's interpretation of Panchayati Raj election deadlines conflicts with Article 243E and state law.

"The interpretation of the orders is not right as per Article 243E - Anup Kumar Rattan"

Shimla, January 9

Stating that the interpretation of recent court orders on Panchayati Raj elections was not correct, Himachal Pradesh Advocate General Anup Kumar Rattan on Friday said that Article 243E of the Constitution and the provisions of the Himachal Pradesh Panchayati Raj Act clearly provide a defined time frame for completing the electoral process.

"The interpretation of the orders is not right as per Article 243E of the Constitution and the Panchayati Raj Act of Himachal Pradesh, and this can be challenged," Rattan said while addressing the media after the High Court pronounced its verdict directing the completion of the Panchayati Raj election process by April 30.

Explaining the State government's stand before the court, the Advocate General said the election process had already been initiated earlier. He informed that 42 gram panchayats were restructured, new gram panchayats and municipal bodies were constituted, and substantial steps in the process had been completed.

Rattan said the delay occurred primarily due to pending appeals related to delimitation before the Divisional Commissioner's court, as well as a separate petition filed by Devender Negi. On that petition, the High Court had directed the State to restart the process while adhering to the prescribed procedure, including inviting and hearing objections.

He added that, as per court directions, local urban bodies were also reorganised. Challenges were raised in areas such as Una, Nadaun and Baddi, where certain gram panchayats were merged into municipal councils or panchayat samitis. The process in these areas, he said, had already been initiated by December 2024, and the government had no intention to delay the elections.

"The time sought by the government was only to ensure that objections were invited, heard, and disposed of properly. This process was to be completed after the final publication by February 24, 2026," the Advocate General said.

Rattan further stated that the State had sought time up to March 2026 to complete the reservation roster, but the High Court had granted only four days for completing certain remaining formalities. He also pointed out that there exists another High Court order that provides a three-month period for publication of lists in the public domain.

Referring to the enforcement of the Disaster Management Act, Rattan said it had been imposed on October 8, 2025, which also impacted the administrative timeline. However, he emphasised that Article 243E mandates a five-year tenure for elected panchayats and allows a maximum period of six months to complete the election process in case of dissolution.

"The State is committed to completing the process, but the legal interpretation of timelines and constitutional provisions needs to be correctly appreciated," he said, adding that the interpretation of the present order could be examined further through appropriate legal remedies.

- ANI

Share this article:

Reader Comments

P
Priya S
This is so frustrating for the people in those 42 restructured gram panchayats! 🤦‍♀️ Local governance is paralyzed without elected representatives. While the legal arguments go on, who is addressing our day-to-day issues? The court's push for a deadline is welcome, but the execution needs to be swift.
R
Rohit P
The Advocate General makes a valid point about the Disaster Management Act impact from Oct 2025. Himachal has faced so many natural calamities recently. That must have diverted administrative bandwidth. However, citing that for delays until 2026 feels like an excuse. The process should have been prioritized.
A
Anjali F
As someone from Una, I know first-hand the confusion when gram panchayats are merged into municipal councils. The reservation roster is a sensitive issue that can't be rushed in four days! The court should allow reasonable time for this to ensure fair representation for SC/ST/OBC communities.
D
David E
Interesting legal debate. The core principle of democracy is timely elections. While procedures are important, the spirit of the Constitution (Article 243E) is to ensure no vacuum in grassroots democracy. The court's intervention to set a firm deadline seems necessary to uphold that spirit.
K
Kavya N
With all respect to the Advocate General's office, this sounds like bureaucratic delay wrapped in legal jargon. "Inviting and hearing objections" is important, but it shouldn't take years. The common villager just wants a functioning panchayat. Hope the legal remedy he mentions leads to faster action, not more delays.

We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.

Leave a Comment

Minimum 50 characters 0/50