Rakesh Kumar And Others vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And Others

Vivek Singh Thakur, J

Preferring present petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India, petitioners have assailed constitution and declaration of Nagar Panchayat, Dharampur, District Mandi, H.P., vide impugned notification dated 20.12.2024, issued by the respondents, alleging the same to be arbitrary, illegal and violative of Articles 14 and 243Q of Constitution of India.

Respondents have defended the constitution of Nagar Panchayat in reference, with submission that impugned notification was issued after fulfilling all legal formalities, by exercising the power conferred upon respondents to do so, for better development and improved arrangements in the area in reference, after giving due consideration to the objections raised by the local inhabitants for fulfilling long standing demand of large number of people of the area.

Vide notification dated 23.11.2024, Department of Urban Development, Government of Himachal Pradesh had invited objections, if any, from inhabitants of the area, specified in the schedule annexed with the notification for proposed declaration of Nagar Panchayat, Dharampur, within a period of two weeks from the date of publication of notification in Rajpatra, (e-Gazette) of Himachal Pradesh, through Deputy Commissioner, Mandi.

Petitioners have placed on record objections/opposition of a constitution of Nagar Panchayat, Dharampur along with communication dated 07.01.2025, as Annexure P-3 (Colly), which indicate that against the constitution of Nagar Panchayat, Dharampur, inhabitants and different organizations had registered their opposition, vide objections dated 19.11.2024, 23.11.2024, 23.11.2024, 02.12.2024, 18.12.2024 and 26.12.2024.

Though, numerous grounds have been narrated in the petition for objecting constitution of Nagar Panchayat, Dharampur, however, during arguments, only following submissions were made.

It is claim of the petitioners that aforesaid objections were not considered by the respondents and further that time of two weeks for filing objections was contrary to the time of four weeks and six weeks to be provided under the Himachal Pradesh Municipal Act, 1994, stipulated in Section 4 of Himachal Pradesh Municipal Act, 1994, providing procedure for declaring municipal area.

It has been further submitted that impugned action of respondents is in violation of and in conflict with provisions of Article 243-Q of the Constitution of India, which provides mandatory procedure for constitution of municipalities. It has been submitted that, especially as provided in provisions of Article 243Q(2), before constitution of Nagar Panchayat Dharampur, the area in reference has not been declared as “transitional area”, “a smaller urban area” or “a larger urban area”, and respondents have failed to take in account relevant factors, i.e. population of the area, density of the population, revenue generated in the area for local administration, percentage of employment in non-agricultural activities, economic importance or such other factors, like the primary source of income of the area in reference, is agriculture as well as the impact of constitution of Nagar Panchayat on the facilities and benefits being extended to the inhabitants under MGNREGA, to families living below poverty line etc.

It has been contended that no participation of inhabitants was permitted in decision making process and opportunity of hearing was not provided and by granting time lesser than provided under the Municipal Act, proper and sufficient time was not allowed to file objections. Further, that such departure from procedure vitiates the initial notification and resultantly final notification also.

It has been further submitted that impugned constitution of Nagar Panchayat is in violation of Section 3 and Section 4 of the Municipal Act, as impugned constitution of Nagar Panchayat is not for a transitional area with population exceeding two thousand and generating annual revenue exceeding Rs.5,00,000/- for the local administration, as prescribed in Section 3(1)(i) of M.C. Act and Deputy Commissioner has not certified affixation of copy of proposal, as required under Section 4(4) of the Municipal Act. By referring explanation contained in Section 3 of the Municipal Act, it has been submitted that ingredients for constitution of Nagar Panchayat along with relevant factors as provided under Article 243Q(2) of the Constitution of India, have not been taken into consideration.

It has been submitted that this Court, in the aforesaid circumstances, is competent to quash and set-aside the impugned notification, as re-organization and constitution of new Panchayats, is still being undertaken by the respondents-State.

To substantiate the plea taken on behalf of petitioners, learned counsel has placed reliance upon judgment dated 18.12.2025, passed by Division Bench of this High Court in CWP No. 6319 of 2025, titled Ravi Chand vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others and pronouncement dated 26.04.2018 of the Apex Court in Civil Appeal No. 4554 of 2018, titled Champa Lal vs. State of Rajasthan and others.

Considering the provisions of Articles 243Q of the Constitution of India, the Apex Court in Champa Lal’s case has observed as under:-

“It is declared under Article 243Q(2) that the expressions “a transitional area”, “a smaller urban area” and “a larger urban area” (hereinafter collectively referred to as “AREAS”) would mean such areas as may be specified by the Governor by a public notification for the purpose of Part IX A of the Constitution of India. Article 243Q(2) further obligates the Governor to have due regard to the various factors mentioned therein before specifying the AREAS i.e. population of the area, the density of the population, the revenue generated in the area for local administration, percentage of employment in non-agricultural activities, the economic importance or such other factors as he may deem fit.

It, therefore, appears from the scheme of Article 243Q(2) that the Governor is not free to notify ‘AREAS’ in his absolute discretion but is required to fix the parameters necessary to determine whether a particular AREA is a transitional area or a smaller urban area or a larger urban area with due regard to the factors mentioned above. It is implicit that such parameters must be uniform for the entire State. It is only after the determination of the parameters, various municipal bodies contemplated under Article 243Q(1) could be constituted.”

Learned Advocate General has submitted that respondents have issued notification dated 23.11.2024 by giving two weeks time to file objections, strictly in consonance with provisions of law, which stood amended, whereas petitioners are banking upon un-amended provisions providing 4/6 weeks time for filing objections, which now stands amended as two weeks only. Further, that process for impugned constitution of Nagar Panchayat, as provided under law, was duly followed and ingredients required for determining the area in reference as transitional area, smaller transitional area for constitution of Nagar Panchayat was duly considered by the authorities and there is no mandate of law to issue notification with respect to such consideration or declaring an area as transitional area, instead such exercise is to be undertaken by the field staff under the supervision of Deputy Commissioner and has to be placed before the competent authority for arriving at a just and legal decision.

It has been submitted by learned Advocate General that in the area concerned, there is a government college, depot of Himachal Road Transport Corporation and various offices of different departments, and area in reference, is situated adjacent to an under construction National Highway. It has been further submitted that authorities concerned have given due consideration to the population of area, density of population therein, revenue generated for administration, percentage of employment of non-agricultural activities, economic importance and all such other factors, necessary to be considered for constitution of Nagar Panchayat, Dharampur. It has been submitted that therefore, judgment passed in Champa Lal’s case, is not applicable in present case.

It has been further stated that facts in Ravi Chand’s case were also different, as in the said case, competent authority had not considered the objections filed by the inhabitants and, therefore, it was conceded by the State that there was a lapse in following the procedure and on the basis of such information placed on record, judgment in Ravi Chand’s case was passed.

To substantiate the plea of consideration of all relevant, factors before constitution of Nagar Panchayat, Dharampur, learned Advocate General had produced record with photocopies of relevant documents, indicating consideration of relevant factors, enumerated in Article 243Q(2) and Explanation to Section 3 of H.P. Municipal Act.

Perusal of record and photocopies of documents placed on record depicts that Deputy Commissioner, Mandi had undertaken the exercise regarding assessment the relevant factors, required to be considered for constitution of Nagar Panchayat, through Sub Divisional Officer (C) Dharampur and Block Development Officer, Development Block Dharampur. In the reports of field staff, submitted to the Director, Urban Development, Himachal Pradesh, it has been communicated that population of Nagar Panchayat, according to census 2011, was 2453, but current population of Nagar Panchayat, as per family register was 2670 and sources of income of Nagar Panchayat from taxes, shop rent and interest was Rs.46,250/-, Rs.1,51,200/- and Rs.75,000/-, respectively, total whereof is Rs.2,72,450/- and total own sources income during the year 2021-22 of Nagar Panchayat, Dharampur was Rs.20,64,281/-, which in future was likely to become Rs.29,42,531/-.

The aforesaid documents also indicates that there are six government educational institute/school/college in the area, which are Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan Government Degree College, Dharampur; Government Sr. Secondary School, Dharampur; GPS Dharampur, GPS Banwar Kalan School; GPS Kalswai School; and Kendriya Vidyalaya, Dharampur. There are four private education institute/school/college in the area, which are Saraswati Vidya Mandir, Dharampur School; New Beam, P.S. Dharampur School; Dharampur Public School, Dharampur, Sal Foundation School and ITI Dharampur.

It is vehemently argued that in absence of opportunity of being heard, objections against constitution of Nagar Panchayat, were not considered properly. All objections have been placed on record. In none of the objection, except stating that inhabitants did not want inclusion of area Banwar Kalan, no specific or justifiable objection has been pointed out. Therefore, these objections appear to have been filed for the sake of filing objections, but not based on any plausible and justifiable reason.

No doubt, in the petition, numerous objections have been narrated, which are similar to legal notice dated 30.03.2025, issued to the respondent through Advocate, but during arguments only above referred objections were pressed into. Even if, these objections are perused, the same are based on surmises and conjunctures without any logic, as to substantiate such objections, nothing has been placed on record, either along with petition or by pointing out such reasons during the course of argument.

From the material on record, it appears that population of area in reference, which has been considered as a transitional area by the respondents, is exceeding two thousand and annual revenue being generated is exceeding Rs.5,00,000/- for the local administration. From the quantum of income, being generated from taxes, shop rents etc. and existence of large number of institutions, it is apparent that having regard to population of area, density of population therein, revenue generated for local administration, percentage of employment in non-agricultural activities and economic importance etc., available on record, there is no arbitrariness, illegality and violation of Articles 14 and 243-Q of the Constitution of India.

In the given facts and circumstances, judgment of the Apex Court in Champa Lal’s case and judgment of Division Bench of this High Court in Ravi Chand’s case, are not applicable.

23.We are of the considered opinion that for the material on record, there is no scope of interference in the impugned notification, dated 20.12.2024, issued for constitution of Nagar Panchayat, Dharampur and, accordingly, petition is dismissed, along with pending applications, if any.