CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsDivision Bench

Madan Lal vs State Of H.P. And Others

High Court Of Himachal Pradesh · Decided on 13 October 2020 · Citation: (2020) 10 SHI CK 0439

HON’BLE JUDGES
L. Narayana Swamy, CJ · Anoop Chitkara, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Civil Writ Petition No. 4241 Of 2020
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

18 paragraphs · 319 words

L. Narayana Swamy, CJ

1.

By way of the instant writ petition, the petitioner has called in question impugned notification, dated 22nd August, 2020 (Annexure PÂ3) qua

bifurcation/division of the existing Gram Panchayat Sarahakar and creation of new Gram Panchayat Bharnag, in District Hamirpur.

2.

The case of the petitioner is that a notification was issued by the Panchayati Raj Department, Government of Himachal Pradesh, for division and

reÂorganization of the Gram Panchayats in the State of Himachal Pradesh, calling for objections, if any, within a period of seven days. The petitioner

alongwith other residents of the Gram Panchayat submitted their objections/ representation to respondent No. 2 within the time stipulated. Thereafter,

a reminder was also made by the petitioner for consideration of their objections, but, so far, the respondents have not considered and decided the

same. Hence, the instant writ petition.

3.

Learned Additional Advocate General submitted that this Court in a case involving the similar issue, being CWP No. 3559 of 2020, titled Gram

Panchayat Taruan versus State of H.P. and another, decided on 15th September, 2020, has held that the aggrieved person has to avail the alternative

remedy provided under the Statute.

4.

We have heard learned counsel for the respective parties.

5.

It is worthwhile to record herein that when a Scheme or the Act provides an efficacious and alternative remedy, then the aggrieved person shall

avail the same, at the first instance. It is impermissible to approach this Court directly, without availing the alternative remedy. Therefore, the petitioner

has to avail the efficacious and alternative remedy, provided under the Act, at the first instance.

6.

In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of in terms of the judgment in CWP No. 3559 of 2020 (supra) reserving liberty to the petitioner to

avail the alternative statutory remedy provided under the Act.

7.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, are also disposed of accordingly.