2025:UHC:247 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA 07th JANUARY, 2025 WRIT PETITION (M/S) NO.3577 of 2024 Mohd Monish ..…Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and Others ..…Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner : Mr. Bhupesh Kandpal, Advocate. Counsel for the : Mr. C.S. Rawat, Chief Respondent nos. 1 and 2 Standing Counsel assisted by Mr. Gajendra Tripathi, Standing Counsel. Counsel for the : Mr. Sanjay Bhatt, Respondent No.4 Advocate. With WRIT PETITION (M/S) NO.3593 of 2024 Sandeep Kumar ..…Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and Others ..…Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner : Mr. Siddhartha Sah, Advocate. Counsel for the : Mr. C.S. Rawat, Chief Respondent nos.1 and 2. Standing Counsel assisted by Mr. Gajendra Tripathi, Standing Counsel. Counsel for the : Mr. Sandeep Kothari, Respondent No.3. Advocate. With WRIT PETITION (M/S) NO.3660 of 2024 Babli Goswami ..…Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and Others ..…Respondents 1 2025:UHC:247 Counsel for the Petitioner : Mr. D.S. Mehta, Advocate. Counsel for the : Mr. C.S. Rawat, Chief Respondent nos.1, 5 & 6. Standing Counsel assisted by Mr. Gajendra Tripathi, Standing Counsel. Counsel for the : Mr. Sanjay Bhatt, Respondent Nos.3 and 4. Advocate. With WRIT PETITION (M/S) NO.3703 of 2024 Bal Mukund Tiwari ..…Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and Others ..…Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner : Ms. Ketki Chaudhary, Advocate. Counsel for the : Mr. C.S. Rawat, Chief Respondents. Standing Counsel assisted by Mr. Gajendra Tripathi, Standing Counsel. w With WRIT PETITION (M/S) NO.28 of 2025 Farhana ..…Petitioner Versus Returning Officer, Urban Local Bodies and Others ..…Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner : Mr. Devadutt Kamat, Senior Advocate (through video conferencing) assisted by Mr. Dushyant Mainali, Advocate. Counsel for the : Mr. Sanjay Bhatt, Respondent Nos.1, 4 and 6. Advocate. Counsel for the : Mr. Devesh Bishnoi, Respondent no.2. Advocate. 2 2025:UHC:247 Counsel for the : Mr. Akshay Prdhan, Respondent no.3. Advocate. Counsel for the : Mr. Ankit Rana, Respondent No.5. Advocate, holding brief of Mr. Sandeep Kothari, Advocate. With WRIT PETITION (M/S) NO.29 of 2025 Islam ..…Petitioner Versus Returning Officer, Urban Local Bodies and Others ..…Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner : Mr. Devadutt Kamat, Senior Advocate (through video conferencing) assisted by Mr. Dushyant Mainali, Advocate. Counsel for the : Mr. Sanjay Bhatt, Respondent Nos.1, 4 and 6. Advocate. Counsel for the : Mr. Devesh Bishnoi, Respondent no.2. Advocate. Counsel for the : Mr. Akshay Prdhan, Respondent no.3. Advocate. Counsel for the : Mr. Ankit Rana, Respondent No.5. Advocate, holding brief of Mr. Sandeep Kothari, Advocate. With WRIT PETITION (M/S) NO.30 of 2025 Israr ..…Petitioner Versus Returning Officer, Urban Local Bodies and Others ..…Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner : Mr. Devadutt Kamat, Senior Advocate (through video conferencing) assisted by Mr. Dushyant Mainali, Advocate. 3 2025:UHC:247 Counsel for the : Mr. Sanjay Bhatt, Respondent Nos.1, 4 and 6. Advocate. Counsel for the : Mr. Devesh Bishnoi, Respondent no.2. Advocate. Counsel for the : Mr. Akshay Prdhan, Respondent no.3. Advocate. Counsel for the : Mr. Ankit Rana, Respondent No.5. Advocate, holding brief of Mr. Sandeep Kothari, Advocate. With WRIT PETITION (M/S) NO.41 of 2025 Yamini Rohilla ..…Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and Others ..…Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner : Mr. Arvind Vashistha, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Bhuwan Bhatt, Advocate. Counsel for the : Mr. C.S. Rawat, Chief Respondent nos.1 and 4. Standing Counsel assisted by Mr. Gajendra Tripathi, Standing Counsel. Counsel for the : Mr. Sanjay Bhatt, Respondent Nos.2 and 3. Advocate. Counsel for the : Ms. Seema Sah, Respondent No.5. Advocate through video conferencing. With WRIT PETITION (M/S) NO.42 of 2025 Ghulaam Gouss ..…Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and Others ..…Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner : Mr. D.S. Patni, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. 4 2025:UHC:247 Tribhuvan Farthiyal, Advocate. Counsel for the : Mr. C.S. Rawat, Chief Respondent No.1 Standing Counsel assisted by Mr. Gajendra Tripathi, Standing Counsel. Counsel for the : Mr. Sanjay Bhatt, Respondent Nos.2 to 4 Advocate. Counsel for the Respondent: Mr. Siddhartha Singh, No.5 Advocate. Counsel for the : Ms. Soniya Chawla, Caveator Advocate. With WRIT PETITION (M/S) NO.43 of 2025 Hargovind Singh Rawal ..…Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and Others ..…Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner : Mr. Shobhit Saharia, Advocate. Counsel for the : Mr. C.S. Rawat, Chief Respondent no.1 Standing Counsel assisted by Mr. Gajendra Tripathi, Standing Counsel. Counsel for the : Mr. Sanjay Bhatt, Respondent No.2 Advocate. With WRIT PETITION (M/S) NO.55 of 2025 Sukhvinder Singh ..…Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and Others ..…Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner : Mr. V.K. Kaparuwan, Advocate. Counsel for the : Mr. C.S. Rawat, Chief Respondent nos.1,2 Standing Counsel and 4. assisted by Mr. Gajendra 5 2025:UHC:247 Tripathi, Standing Counsel. Counsel for the : Mr. Sanjay Bhatt, Respondent Nos.3 & 5. Advocate. Counsel for the : Mr. S.K. Mandal, Caveator/Complainant Advocate. With WRIT PETITION (M/S) NO.66 of 2025 Abbal Singh Kathait ..…Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and Others ..…Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner : Mr. Abhijay Negi, Advocate. Counsel for the : Mr. C.S. Rawat, Chief Respondent nos.1 and 2. Standing Counsel assisted by Mr. Gajendra Tripathi, Standing Counsel. Counsel for the : Mr. Sanjay Bhatt, Respondent No.3 Advocate. Hon’ble Alok Kumar Verma,J. The Writ Petition (M/S) No.3577 of 2024 has been filed with the following prayers:- “(i) A writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the Notification 1496/IV(3)/2024-11(3 Nirva)/2024 dated 14.12.2014 issued (and published on 15.12.2024) by the department to the extent it relates to Nagar Nigam Kashipur whereby the seat was declared as General Seat; being voilative of law . (ii) A writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent 6 2025:UHC:247 authorities to consider the representation dated 20.12.2024 (submitted online on 21.12.2024) before the respondent no.3, preferred by the petitioner in accordance with law keeping in view the law laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court as well as Rule 6 of the Rules 2024 within a stipulated time period. (Annexure-3 to this writ petition). (iii) Any other suitable writ, order or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. (iv) Award the cost of petition to the petitioner.” 2. The Writ Petition (M/S) No.3593 of 2024 has been filed with the following prayers:- “(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the notification dated 23.12.2024 issued by the Additional Secretary Urban Development, State of Uttarakhand, Dehradun to the extent of reserving the post of Adhyaksh, Nagar Panchayat Selaqui for Other Backward Caste. (contained in Annexure No. 7) (ii). Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to de-reserve the post of Adhyaksh, Nagar Panchayat Selaqui as an OBC seat. (iii). Issue any other suitable writ order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem 7 2025:UHC:247 fit, just and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case.” 3. The Writ Petition (M/S) No.3660 of 2024 has been filed with the following prayers:- “(i) To issue a writ order, or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 29.12.2024 (Annexure No.8 to this Writ Petition) passed by respondent no.6. (ii) To issue a writ order, or direction in nature of mandamus commanding and directing to the respondents to issue OBC Caste certificate in favour of the petitioner. (iii) To issue a writ order, or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing to the respondents to accept the nomination form of the petitioner as OBC candidate for the post of Chairman, Nagar Palika Parishad, Dineshpur, Udham Singh Nagar. (iv) To pass a suitable writ, order or direction in favour of the petitioner and against the respondents which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case. (v) To Award cost of the petition.” 4. The Writ Petition (M/S) No.3703 of 2024 has been filed with the following prayers:- “(i) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing/setting aside 8 2025:UHC:247 the said tentative and final notifications dated 14.12.2024 (Annexure No. 2) and 23.12.2024 (Annexure No. 3) respectively, showing the list of seats of 46 Chairman of Nagar Panchayats that has been wrongly declared reserved or unreserved for different categories because the said list has not been prepared in accordance with law. (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus, commanding the respondent to issue a fresh notification or a revised list of 46 seats of Chairman of Nagar Panchayat by strictly following the procedure as laid down in provisions of the Uttarakhand Nagar Palika/Nagar Panchayat (Reservation and Allotment of Seat and Post) Rules, 2024 (Annexure No. 1). (iii) Any other order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and appropriate.” 5. The Writ Petition (M/S) No.28 of 2025 has been filed with the following prayers:- “(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 01.01.2025 passed by respondent по. 1 vide Order No. 12/ना० स्था०Ǔन० सा०Ǔन०/ 2024-25 (Annexure No. 1 to the writ petition) so far as it relates to the petitioner, whereby the nomination paper of the petitioner filed for contesting election on the post of Chairman of Municipal Council of Nagar Palika Parishad, Manglaur, District Haridwar in Urban Local 9 2025:UHC:247 Bodies General Election, 2024 has been rejected. (ii) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing and commanding the respondents particularly respondent nos. 1, 4 & 6 to approve the nomination paper of the petitioner and to forthwith allot election symbol and permit her to contest the municipal election 2024 for the post of Chairman of Nagar Palika Parishad Manglaur, District Haridwar. (iii) Issue any other, further writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. (iv) To award the cost of the petition in favour of the petitioner.” 6. The Writ Petition (M/S) No.29 of 2025 has been filed with the following prayers:- “(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 01.01.2025 passed by respondent. no. 1 vide Order No. 12/ना० स्था०Ǔन०सा०Ǔन०/ 2024-25 (Annexure No. 1 to the writ petition) so far as it relates to the petitioner, whereby the nomination paper of the petitioner filed for contesting election on the post of Chairman of Municipal Council of Nagar Palika Parishad, Manglaur, District Haridwar in Urban Local Bodies General Election, 2024 has been rejected. 10 2025:UHC:247 (ii) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing and commanding the respondents particularly respondent nos. 1, 4 & 6 to approve the nomination paper of the petitioner and to forthwith allot election symbol and permit him to contest the municipal election 2024 for the post of Chairman of Nagar Palika Parishad Manglaur, District Haridwar. (iii) Issue any other, further writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. (iv) To award the cost of the petition in favour of the petitioner.” 7. The Writ Petition (M/S) No.30 of 2025 has been filed with the following prayers:- “(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 01.01.2025 passed by respondent no. 1 vide Order No. 12/ना०स्था०Ǔन०सा०Ǔन०/2024-25 (Annexure No. 1 to the writ petition) so far as it relates to the petitioner, whereby the nomination paper of the petitioner filed for contesting election on the post of Chairman of Municipal Council of Nagar Palika Parishad, Manglaur, District Haridwar in Urban Local Bodies General Election, 2024 has been rejected. (ii) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing and 11 2025:UHC:247 commanding the respondents particularly respondent nos. 1, 4 & 6 to approve the nomination paper of the petitioner and to forthwith allot election symbol and permit him to contest the municipal election 2024 for the post of Chairman of Nagar Palika Parishad Manglaur, District Haridwar. (iii) Issue any other, further writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. (iv) To award the cost of the petition in favour of the petitioner.” 8. Present Writ Petition (M/S) No.41 of 2025 has been filed with the following prayers:- “(i) Issue a writ, order, or direction in the nature of certiorari to set aside the order dated 01.01.2025 bearing letter no. 53/2025/2024-25 (Annexure No. 1) passed by the respondent no. 3, whereby the respondent no. 3 rejected the nomination form of the petitioner for the seat of Chairman, Nagar Palika Parishad Herbertpur which has been reserved by the reservation roster for the OBC Women. (ii) Issue a suitable writ, order or direction in favor of petitioner which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case. (iii) To award the cost of the present writ petition to the petitioner.” 12 2025:UHC:247 9. The Writ Petition (M/S) No.42 of 2025 has been filed with the following prayers:- “(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 01.01.2025 passed by the Returning Officer, Nagar Palika Gadarpur (contained as Annexure no.3 to this writ petition) and to direct the respondent no.2 to include the name of the petitioner in the list of contesting candidates for the Election to the position of Chairman, Nagar Palika, Gadarpur. (ii) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the District Returning Officer, U.S. Nagar/District Magistrate U.S. Nagar/respondent no.2 herein to forthwith decide the petitioner’s representation dated 02.01.2025 (contained as Annexure no.4) against arbitrary rejection of his Nomination form for the position of Chairman, Nagar Palika, Gadarpur and pass a speaking and reasoned order and communicate the same to the petitioner. (iii) Issue any writ order which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the interest of justice.” 10. The Writ Petition (M/S) No.43 of 2025 has been filed with the following prayers:- “(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 01.01.2025 annexed as 13 2025:UHC:247 Annexure no.1. (ii). Issue any suitable order or direction of any nature which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper. (iii). Award the cost of the writ petition in favour of the petitioner.” 11. The Writ Petition (M/S) No.55 of 2025 has been filed with the following prayers:- “(i) Issue a writ, order or direction, in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned rejection dated 1.1.2025 by respondent no.3, contained as Annexure no.1 to the writ petition. (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction, in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to permit the petitioner for contesting the election of Chairman, Nagar Panchayat, Nanakmatta, District Udham Singh Nagar. (iii) Issue a writ, order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case. (iv) Award the cost of the petition.” 12. The Writ Petition (M/S) No.66 of 2025 has been filed with the following prayers:- “(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the notification dated 23rd December 2024 (Annexure No. 4) with respect to the reservation of the 14 2025:UHC:247 Chairperson of Nagar Panchayat seat, Nandanagar as it has been issued without taking into account the demographic of Nandanagar as it has been reserved for female despite the fact that the population of males exceeds the population of females (see Annexure No. 5 (Colly.)). (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus, commanding the respondent, Director of Urban Development to take a reasoned decision on the representation dated 16th December 2024 as submitted by the petitioner in the office of Director of Urban and Development (Annexure No. 1), and subsequently re-issue the final notification with respect to reservation of seat of Chairperson of Nagar Panchayat, Nandanagar. (iii) Pass any other order that this court may deemed fit in the interest of justice, equity and good conscious.” 13. The Writ Petition No.3577 of 2024 is being treated as a leading case. 14. Mr. Bhupesh Kandpal, Advocate appearing for the petitioner in WPMS No.3577 of 2024 has contended that the petitioner is willing to contest the election from Kashipur as Chairman, Nagar Nigam Kashipur. He belongs to the OBC category. His objection has not been decided. He has relied upon a judgment dated 15 2025:UHC:247 23.07.2024, passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.7930 of 2024, “Kishorchandra Chhanganlal Rathod Vs. Union of India and Others”. 15. Mr. Siddhartha Sah, Advocate, appearing for the petitioner in WPMS No.3593 of 2024, has contended that the petitioner is a member of General category. He wants to contest the election for the post of Chairman, Nagar Panchayat Selaqui. But the notification dated 23.12.2024 has been issued by which the said post has been reserved for Other Backward Classes. Mr. Siddhartha Sah, Advocate, has further argued that the said action of the respondents is against Rule 6 of the Uttarakhand Nagar Palika/Nagar Panchayat (Reservation and allotment for the place and posts) Rules, 2024. He relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) vs. Secretary, Governor’s Secretariat and Others, (2020) 6 SCC 548. 16. Mr. D.S. Mehta, Advocate, appearing for the petitioner in WPMS No.3660 of 2024 has argued that the petitioner belongs to OBC category. The respondents had not accepted her nomination form as OBC candidate for the post of Chairman, Nagar Palika 16 2025:UHC:247 Parishad, Dineshpur. 17. Ms. Ketki Chaudhary, Advocate, appearing for the petitioner in WPMS No.3703 of 2024, has argued that the petitioner is willing to contest the post of Chairman, Nagar Panchayat, Selaqui. Petitioner is a member of the general category. The said post has been reserved illegally for OBC. She has relied upon a judgment of the Hon’ble Hon’ble Supreme Court, in “The State of Goa and Another Vs. Fouziya Imtiaz Shaikh and Another, AIR OnLine 2021 SC 166”, but, in the facts of this writ petition, it has not been made clear as to how the decision rendered in the said case can help the petitioner. 18. Mr. Devadutt Kamat, learned Senior Advocate, appearing for the petitioner in WPMS No.28 of 2025, WPMS No.29 of 2025 and WPMS No.30 of 2025, has contended that the petitioners are willing to contest the post of Chairman of Municipal Body of Nagar Palika Parishad, Manglaur, but, the respondent no.1 has rejected the nomination forms of the petitioners on the ground that the petitioners are encroacher of nazul property. But as per the Nagar Palika itself, the petitioners are not the encroachers. Mr. Devadutt Kamant, learned Senior Advocate, has relied 17 2025:UHC:247 upon a judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, passed in “Election Commission of India Vs. Ashok Kumar and Others, (2000) 8 SCC 216”. 19. Mr. Arvind Vashistha, learned Senior Advocate, appearing for the petitioner in WPMS No.41 of 2025 has contended that the petitioner belongs to OBC category. She wants to contest the election of Chairman, Nagar Palika Parishad, Herbertpur. The said post is reserved for OBC (women). The nomination paper of the petitioner has been rejected on the ground that she has obtained caste certificates from the State of Chhattisgarh as well as from the State of Uttarakhand and the said caste certificates have been found suspicious. 20. Mr. D.S. Patni, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner in WPMS No.42 of 2025 has contended that the petitioner had correctly filed his nomination form but his nomination form has been rejected illegally. His nomination form has been rejected by misinterpreting the provision of Section 154 (3) of the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 (as amended by the State of Uttarakhand w.e.f. 15.01.2004). 21. Mr. Sobhit Saharia, Advocate, appearing for 18 2025:UHC:247 the petitioner in WPMS No.43 of 2025 has contended that the petitioner wants to contest the election for the post of Chairman, Nagar Palika Parishad, Gangolihat, but, the impugned order has been passed by the respondent no.2 on the ground that the petitioner has three children and hence he is not eligible for the post of Chairman under Section 43 AA of the Uttar Pradesh Nagar Palika Act, 1916. 22. Mr. V.K. Kaparuwan, Advocate, appearing for the petitioner in WPMS No.55 of 2025, has contended that the petitioner wants to contest the election of Chairman of Nagar Panchayat, Nanakmatta, District Udham Singh Nagar, but, his nomination form has been rejected illegally by the respondent no.3. 23. Mr. Abhijay Negi, Advocate, appearing for the petitioner in WPMS No.66 of 2025, has contended that the petitioner wants to contest the election for the post of Chairperson of the Nagar Panchayat, Nandanagar, but, the said post has been reserved for women against the Rule 6(c) of the Uttarakhand Nagar Palika/Nagar Panchayat (Reservation and allotment for the place and posts) Rules, 2024. Mr. Abhijay Negi, Advocate, has relied upon a judgment of the Hon’ble Hon’ble Supreme Court, passed in “Union Territory of Ladakh and 19 2025:UHC:247 Others Vs. Jammu and Kashmir National Conference and Another, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1140”. 24. Mr. C.S. Rawat, learned Chief Standing Counsel, on the other hand, has contended that the schedule of the tenure of urban local bodies in the State excluding Roorkee, Bazpur, Badrinath, Kedarnath, Selaqui and Gangotri was supposed to end on 02.12.2023. However, elections were delayed due to delay in delimitation of the constituencies and the publications of rolls. Now, the State Election Commission announced that elections will be held in all urban bodies barring Kichha and Narendra Nagar. He has further argued that there can be no interference in the elections after the announcement of the State Election Commission. 25. The State Election Commission has announced the election schedule on 23.12.2024. The Election schedule is as follows:- (i) Nomination Date – 27.12.2024 to 30.12.2024. (ii) Scrutiny of the nomination papers – 31.12.2024 to 01.01.2025. (iii) Date for Withdrawal of nomination – 20 2025:UHC:247 02.01.2025. (iv) Allotment of Symbols – 03.01.2025. (v) Date of Voting - 23.01.2025. (vi) Date of Counting of Votes – 25.01.2025. 26. Mr. Siddhartha Singh, learned counsel for respondent no.5 in WPMS No.42 of 2025, Mr. S.K. Mandal, learned counsel for caveator/complainant in WPMS No.55 of 2025, Mr. Akshay Pradhan, learned counsel for respondent no.3 in WPMS No.28 of 2025, WPMS No.29 of 2025 and WPMS No.30 of 2025 and Mr. Devesh Bishnoi, learned counsel for respondent no.2 in WPMS No.28 of 2025, WPMS No.29 of 2025 and WPMS No.30 of 2025 have argued that the prayers made by writ petitioners have the effect of directly or indirectly interfering with the election in some way or the other. 27. Article 243 ZG of the Constitution of India over-rides any other provisions of the constitution, as is clear from the opening words, “Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution”. Article 243 ZG reads as follows:- “243ZG. Bar to interference by courts in electoral matters.- Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution,— 21 2025:UHC:247 (a) the validity of any law relating to the delimitation of constituencies or the allotment of seats to such constituencies, made or purporting to be made under article 243ZA shall not be called in question in any court; (b) no election to any Municipality shall be called in question except by an election petition presented to such authority and in such manner as is provided for by or under any law made by the Legislature of a State.” 28. Clause (b) of Article 243 ZG imposes a bar upon a Court against interfering in electoral matters except in an election petition presented to such authority and in such manner as may be prescribed by or under law made by the State Legislature. Therefore, in view of the said provision, writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot ordinarily be invoked because of the bar imposed by Clause (b) of Article 243 ZG and when elections are imminent or well underway. 29. In “Anugrah Narain Singh & Another Vs. State Of Uttar Pradesh & Others, 1996 AIR OnLine SC 1178” the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that no election to a Municipality can be questioned except by an election petition. Moreover, it is well settled by now that if the election is imminent or well underway, the 22 2025:UHC:247 Court should not intervene to stop the election process. If this is allowed to be done, no election will ever take place because someone or the other will always find some excuse to move the Court and stall the elections. 30. In the case of “Shri Sant Sadguru Janardan Swami (Moingiri Maharaj) Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others, (2001) 8 SCC 509”, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that it is well settled that the High Court should not stay the continuation of the election process even though there may be some alleged illegality or breach of rules while preparing the electoral roll. 31. In “Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) (Supra) and Kishorchandra Chhanganlal Rathod (Supra), the factual disputes were regarding delimitation. In Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) (Supra), the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the constitutional object of Part IX cannot be effectively achieved unless the delimitation exercise for constitution of local bodies at all levels is properly undertaken. In the said case, there were only 31 revenue districts, but despite a subsequent increase in number of districts to 39, no fresh delimitation exercise was undertaken. The controversy involved in Union 23 2025:UHC:247 Territory of Ladakh and Others (Supra) was the non-allocation of the Plough symbol. This is not the case here, and, therefore, the said decisions are of no help to the case of the petitioners, the same is distinguishable. 32. In the matter of WPMS No.28, 29 and 30 of 2025, the respondent no.1 had passed the impugned order after hearing the parties including the present petitioners. In the light of the facts of these petitions, it has not been explained by the petitioners how the decision rendered in the Election Commission of India Vs. Ashok Kumar and Others (Supra) can help them. 33. Mr. C.S. Rawat, learned Chief Standing Counsel, has contended that the State Government had provided to file objections and be heard and more than thousand objections were decided. The present writ petitions have been filed only with the intention of interfering in the elections and stalling the elections. 34. In view of the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court discussed hereinabove, it is evident that once the election process commences and is notified, then the Court should not interfere with such election under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 24 2025:UHC:247 35. The State Government had offered to hear the grievances and provided opportunities to file objections. More than thousand objections had been decided. No material is available on record regarding any mala fide intention of the respondents. Therefore, no merit is found in the present writ petitions. The writ petitions are liable to be dismissed. 36. In the result, the writ petitions are dismissed. 37. There shall be no order as to costs. 38. Let a copy of this judgment be placed in the connected writ petitions. 39. Mr. Shobhit Saharia, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in WPMS No.43 of 2025 has requested to grant liberty to the petitioner to file a writ petition to assail the validity of Section 13D read with Section 43 AA of the Uttar Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1916 being repugnant to Section 12 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 more particularly Section 12. The said request has not been opposed by the respondents. In the interest of justice, liberty is granted as prayed by Mr. Shobhit Saharia, Advocate, but in accordance with law. ___________________ ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J. Dt:07.01.2025 Neha 25 NEHA BISHT Digitally signed by NEHA BISHT DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=6f1c15b6305912b3f008e9a4a80 38ee7326b08b2d0e018b01be753f014836 d27, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=3D89DC33779FB96770684 52F32DE6BA960BFE64D819EE44CA9CCE4 87B2FE0F92, cn=NEHA BISHT Date: 2025.01.08 14:44:08 +05'30' 2025:UHC:247 26