GURMUKH SINGH SOHAL Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

LAWS(P&H)-2021-1-207

HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

Decided on January 19,2021

Gurmukh Singh Sohal Appellant

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB Respondents

JUDGEMENT

ASHOK KUMAR VERMA,J. - (1.) CM No.12126 of 2020 This is an application actual constitution of Board. Vide notification dated 14.07.2020 (P-4) only delimitation board was constituted and boundaries were not expanded/shrunk. Since on 18.08.2020, notification ordering de-freezing of boundaries was issued therefore the final publication Under Rule 9 would be saved. Hence, even this argument raised by Ld. Counsel for petitioner is without merit. 14. The argument regarding grant of insufficient time for filing objections to notification dated 14.07.2020 (P-5) is also without any merit. We are of the opinion that insufficiency of time for filing objections cannot be a ground for striking down the Constitution of Board, especially when no time has been prescribed by the Rules 1972. The validity of the said Rules, which do not provide for any specific time, are not even under challenge before this Court. Even otherwise, it is not the case of the petitioner that he did not know about the notification pertaining to constitution of Delimitation Board. Further, we are of definitive opinion that when specific statutory rules of 1972 are in place governing the procedure and process for de-limitation, then 1979 Rules cannot be applied so as to imply any time frame for calling of objections. 15. Likewise, the argument that certain areas have been completely left out during the delimitation process and same has been done in tearing hurry are also without any merit. It is clear from the pleading of the parties, to which there is no rebuttal that the Statutory Boundary of Municipalities are not being changed and in fact, division of wards as per population is being done. It has been specifically mentioned in the affidavit filed by respondent no 6 that the seats have been fixed as per Rule 3 of the Determination of number of Elected Members and Reservation of Offices of Presidents of Municipalities Rules, 1994. As per Rule 3, Schedule-I, the criteria for determining the number of elected members in Municipal Councils and Panchayats is on the basis of population as ascertained at the last proceeding census of which the relevant figures have been published. Further, in view of the fact no person has been debarred from casting his/her vote and all the voters are permitted to cast their vote in their jurisdiction, we are convinced that no prejudice has been caused to any voter as alleged." 14. In such matters, the scope of judicial review is very limited. Judicial review of administrative action is intended to prevent arbitrariness, irrationality, unreasonableness, bias and mala fides. In the present case, we find no perversity, arbitrariness and illegality in the action of the official respondents. 15. In view of the above, we see no reason to interfere with the action of the official respondents. The writ petition fails and is dismissed accordingly, with no order as to costs. Consequent upon the dismissal of this writ petition, Misc. Application (CM No. 12127 of 2020) for staying the operation/execution and effect of the notification 31.7.2020 (Annexure P-2) and others shall stand disposed of accordingly. ;

Click here to view full judgement.