2026:HHC:15700 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No.7207 of 2026 Decided on: 11.05.2026 _________________________________________________________________ Chander Pal Aggarwal and Ors. ....Petitioners Versus State of H.P. & Ors …Respondents _________________________________________________________________ Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua 1 Whether approved for reporting? _________________________________________________________________ For the petitioners: Mr. Shubham Sood, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, with Ms. Seema Sharma, Deputy, Additional Advocate, for respondents No. 1, 4 and 5. Mr. Surender Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.2. Mr. Varun Rana, Advocate, for respondent No.3. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Ms. Seema Sharma, learned Deputy Advocate General, Mr. Surender Sharma and Mr. Varun Rana, learned counsel, appear and waive service of notice on 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes 2026:HHC:15700 - 2 - behalf of the respective respondents. 2. Petitioners seek direction to the respondents to shift their names from electoral roll of Ward No.5 to Ward No.11 of Municipal Corporation, Solan. Petitioners’ case is that they are members of same family and have been exercising their voting rights in Ward No. 11 of Municipal Corporation Solan, District Solan, H.P. They are residents of Ward No. 11, but in the ensuing elections to the Urban Local Bodies of the respondent-State including Municipal Corporation Solan, as notified by respondent No. 2 on 21.04.2026, names of the petitioners have been reflected as voters from Ward No.5, District Solan. According to the petitioners, this is an erroneous and illegal shifting of their votes. Their votes are required to reflected in Ward No.11. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have moved online applications on 04.05.2026 (Annexure P-5 colly) to the Booth Level Officer for shifting their votes to Ward No.11, but without success. 3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the case file. 2026:HHC:15700 - 3 - Chapter 4 of the Himachal Pradesh Municipal Corporation Election Rules, 2012, deals with the subject ‘Electoral Rolls’. As per Rule 17 thereof, the draft electoral roll of a ward, once ready, is to be published in draft according to the programme issued by the respondents. Rule 18 provides period of ten days from the date of publication of draft electoral roll for lodging claim for inclusion of names in the electoral roll and objection to an entry therein. Rule 20 stipulates the manner of lodging of claim or objections in Forms 4, 5 or 6 as the case may be. The claims/objections are to be disposed of in terms of Rule 22, whereafter, final electoral rolls are published under Rule 23. These Rules read as under: - “17. Publication of Electoral roll in draft.- (1) Once the draft Electoral roll of a ward is ready, the Electoral Registration Officer shall publish it in draft according to programme issued by the Commission together with a notice in Form-3 and make available copies thereof for inspection at his office, and in the offices of the Corporation and Tehsil concerned. (2) The notice under sub-rule (1) shall also be given publicity through news-papers having large circulation in the area, All India Radio, by beat of drum in the town and by affixing copies of such notice in his office and office of the Corporation and the Tehsil concerned and at such other conspicuous place where the public has free access. The notice shall contain the date by which objections or claims may be filed and the 2026:HHC:15700 - 4 - authority or authorities to whom they may be presented. 18. Period for lodging claims and objections.- Every claim for the inclusion of name in the Electoral roll and every objection to an entry therein shall be lodged within a period of 10 days from the date of publication of draft Electoral roll under rule 17, or within such shorter period as may be fixed by the Commission in this behalf. 19. Appointment of Revising Authorities.- The Electoral Registration Officer may appoint one or more Revising Authority(ies) for the purpose of hearing claims and objections relating to Electoral roll of a ward or wards. These appointments as and when made shall be given wide publicity. 20. Manner of lodging of claims and objections.- (1) A claim or objection shall be addressed to the Revising Authority specified in the notice referred to in rule 19 and shall be presented to it personally or sent by registered post. Every claim for inclusion of name, objection to the inclusion of the name or objection to the particulars in any entry in the electoral roll shall be in Forms 4,5 or 6, as the case may be. (2) A claim shall be signed by the person desiring his name to be included in the Electoral roll and countersigned by another person whose name is already included in the Electoral roll in which the claimant desires his name to be included and shall, unless sent by post, be presented by claimant himself or by a person authorized by him in writing in this behalt. (3) No person shall prefer an objection to the inclusion of any name in the Electoral roll, unless his name is already included in that Electoral roll of the Corporation. (4) The Revising Authority shall maintain a register of claims, in Form-7, a register of objections to the inclusion of names in Form-8, and a register 2026:HHC:15700 - 5 - of objections to the particulars in any entry in Form-9, and cause to be entered therein the time of their receipt, particulars of every claim or objection, as the case may be. 5) Any claim or objection, which is not lodged within the specified period or in the manner herein specified, shall be rejected and the decision shall be recorded in the register prepared in Forms 7,8 and 9, as the case may be. 21. Notice of claims and objections.- (1) Where a claim or objection is not rejected under sub-rule (5) of rule 20 the Revising Authority shall after the period specified for the presentation of daims and objections has expired, exhibit on the notice board of his office, a list of all claims or objections in Forms 10,11 and 12, as the case may be. (2) Every claimant and objector shall be given a notice regarding place, date and time of hearing of such claim or objection and shall further be asked to adduce such evidence, as he may like to adduce in Forms 13,14 and 16, as the case my be. 3) A person against whom objection has been received by the Revising Authority for the inclusion or deletion of his name in or from the electoral roll shall also be given a notice in Form 15 of the place, date and time fixed for hearing of objection, at his last known place of residence and be asked to adduce such evidence as he may like to adduce for his defense. 22. Disposal of claims and objections.- (1) On the date, time and place fixed under the provisions of rule 20, the Revising Authority shall hear and decide within 10 days or such shorter period as may be specified by the Commission the claims and objections under the provisions of these rules, and shall record his decision in the registers in Forms 7,8 and 9, as the case may be. (2) Copy of the order relating to the objection shall be given on payment of Rs. 15/- to the claimant against receipt and objector immediately, if he is present. Otherwise he can 2026:HHC:15700 - 6 - get the copy of the same on payment of Rs. 25/- in cash against receipt. (3) Any person aggrieved by an order passed under the provisions of sub-rule (1), may, within 3 days from the date of the order, file an appeal to Electoral Registration Officer, who shall as far as practicable, within a week, decide the same. (4) If it appears to the Electoral Registration Officer that due to inadvertence or error during the preparation of draft Electoral rolls, names of electors have been left-out of the Electoral roll or the names of dead persons or persons who ceased to be or are not ordinarily resident in the ward or part thereof have been included in the Electoral roll or certain voters have been shown in the wrong ward or polling station and that remedial action is required to be taken under this sub-rule, shall within seven days from the date of publication of draft Electoral roll- (a) prepare a list of the name and other particulars of such electors; (b) exhibit on the notice board of his office a copy of the list together with a notice as to the date(s) and place (s) at which the matter of inclusion of the names in Electoral roll or deletion of the names from the Electoral roll shall be considered; and (c) after considering any verbal or written objection that may be preferred, decide whether all or any of the names may be included in or deleted from the Electoral roll. 23. Final publication of Electoral roll.- (1) The Revising Authority as soon as it has disposed of all the claims or objections presented to it, shall forward the same along with the register of such claims or objections and the orders passed by it thereon to the Electoral Registration Officer, who shall cause the Electoral roll to be corrected in accordance with such orders or the orders passed on appeal by him under sub-rule (3) of rule 22 and corrections consequential to sub-rule(4) of rule 22, as the case may be, and shall publish the final Electoral roll, on a date fixed by the Commission by making a 2026:HHC:15700 - 7 - complete copy thereof available for inspection and display a notice thereof in Form- I7 in his office and also in the offices of the Corporation and the Tehsil concerned (2) On such publication, the Electoral roll with or without amendments shall be the electoral roll of the ward or part thereof and shall come into force from the date of its publication under this rule.” 4. Admittedly, the draft electoral rolls for Municipal Corporation Solan, including its Ward Nos. 5 and 11 were published by respondent No.4. It is not the case of the petitioners that they lodged any objections to the draft electoral rolls in terms of and in the manner prescribed under the aforesaid Rules. Under the draft electoral rolls, names of petitioners figured in Ward No.5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners’ inclusion in electoral rolls for Ward No.11 is permissible under Rule 26. The said Rule reads as under: - “ 26 Inclusion of names in Electoral roll, finally published.- (1) Any person, whose name is not included in the Electoral roll, shall make an application in Form-4 (in duplicate) to the Electoral Registration Officer for inclusion of his name in that Electoral roll, and such application shall be accompanied by a fee of Rs. 50/- to be paid in cash against receipt: Provided further that an application under this rule shall not be submitted after the Notification of Election programme under Rule 33 of these rules. 2026:HHC:15700 - 8 - (2) The Electoral Registration Officer shall immediately on receipt of application under sub-rule (1) paste one copy thereof in some conspicuous place at his office and invite objections thereto to be filed within a period of 4 days from the date of such pasting. (3) The Electoral Registration Officer shall, as soon as may be, after the expiry of the period as specified in the notice under sub-rule (2), consider the objections, if any received by him and shall, if satisfied that the applicant is entitled to be registered in the Electoral roll, direct such name to be included therein accordingly: Provided that if the applicant whose name is ordered to be included, is already registered in the electoral roll of any other ward or part thereof such name shall be deleted from that Electoral roll. (4) Where an application made under sub-rule (1) is rejected, an appeal shall lie, within a period of ten days from the date of rejection of the application for the inclusion of name or deletion of name to the Divisional Commissioner and the appeal shall be accompanied by a fee of Rs. 50/- to be paid in cash against receipt. The Divisional Commissioner shall decide the appeal within 7 days after giving opportunity to the party concerned of being heard and the order passed on such appeal shall be final. (5) No amendment, transposition or deletion of any entry shall be made on or after the last date for making nomination till the election process is over. Once petitioners’ names had been admittedly published in the draft electoral rolls of Ward No.5 and they did not lodge any claim/objections to the aforesaid inclusion of their names in Ward No.5, benefit of Rule 26 cannot be extended to them at this stage. Rule 26 will not be applicable 2026:HHC:15700 - 9 - to the given situation. In the present case, petitioners’ names were already included in the electoral rolls of Ward No.5. Present is not a case where petitioners’ names are not included in the electoral rolls of any ward of Municipal Corporation Solan. In fact, the case of the petitioners is covered against them by Tek Singh & Ors Vs. H.P. State Election Commission & Ors2, wherein Rule 24 of the Himachal Pradesh Panchayat Raj (Elections) Rules 1994, which is almost similar to Rule 26 of the Himachal Pradesh Municipal Corporation Election Rules, 2012 was being deliberated for inclusion of the names of the petitioners’ therein in the voter list. It was held as under: - “5. Rule 24 of the Himachal Pradesh Panchayati Raj (Elections) Rules, 1994, reads as under:- 24. Inclusion of names in the electoral roll, finally published.- (1) Any person, whose name is not included in the electoral roll shall make an application, in Form-2 (in duplicate), to the District Election Officer (Panchayats) for inclusion of his name in that electoral roll, and such application shall be accompanied by a fee of rupees two to be paid in cash against receipt. (2) District Election Officer (Panchayats) shall immediately on receipt of application under sub-rule (1) direct that one copy thereof be pasted in some conspicuous place in his office together with a notice inviting objections to such application within a period of four days from the date of such pasting. 2 CWP No.6426 of 2020 decided on 01.01.2021 2026:HHC:15700 - 10 - (3) The District Election Officer (Panchayats) shall as may be, after the expiry of the period specified in the notice under sub-rule (2), consider the objections, if any, received by him and shall, if satisfied that the applicants entitled to be registered in the electoral roll, direct such name to be included therein within a period of 3 days: Provided that if the applicant whose name is ordered to be included is already registered in the electoral roll of any other constituency of the same Gram Sabha or another Gram Sabha or a Municipality, such a name shall be deleted from that electoral roll: Provided further that an application under this rule at any time after publication of the election programme under rule 32 shall be made to the District Election Officer (Panchayats) not later than 9 days before the last date fixed for the filing of nomination papers: Provided further that no amendment or transposition or deletion of any entry shall be made on or after the last date for making nomination till the election process is over. (4) Where an application made under sub-rule (1), is rejected, an appeal shall be within a period of ten days from the date of rejection of the application for the inclusion of names to the State Election Commission, whose decision shall be final.(5) Every appeal under subrule (4) shall be accompanied by a fee of twenty rupees to be paid in cash against receipts. 6. However, learned counsel for the petitioner would argue that voter list, in fact, was circulated on 03.08.2020 wherein the names of the petitioner and other family members were duly reflected and it was only in the final voter list their names are conspicuously absent. 7. We do not find any merit in this contention because the draft electoral roll in the instant case was published on 03.10.2020 and the same was kept for inspection in the Panchayat Ghar from 05.10.2020 to 2026:HHC:15700 - 11 - 14.10.2020 and after considering all the formalities like objections etc., the same was finally published on 05.11.2020. 8. Confronted with this, the learned counsel for the petitioner would still argue that no such exercise as stated by the learned Advocate General was ever undertaken by the Department, but we find no merit in the said contention. 9. Sections 35 and 114(e) of the Evidence Act declare that there was always presumption of regularity of an official act. Of course, such presumption is rebuttable presumption. (See: Jagjit Singh vs. State of Haryana (2006) 11 SCC 1). 10. The wise principle of presumption which is also recognised by the legislature, is that judicial and official acts are regularly performed. The presumption is based on the legal maxim omnia praesumuntur rite it dowee probetur in contrarium solemniter esse acta i.e. all the acts are presumed to have been done rightly and regularly, applies. When acts are of official nature and went through the process of scrutiny by official persons, a presumption arises that the said acts have regularly been performed. The learned counsel for the petitioner has miserably failed to rebut the presumption. 11. Lastly and more importantly, it is also axiomatic that normally the High Court exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India should not interfere with the process of election once the same has already commenced. 12. Reference in this regard can conveniently be made to the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in 2026:HHC:15700 - 12 - Nanhoo Mal and others vs. Hiramal & Ors., (1976) 3 SCC 211, Shri Sant Sadguru Janardan Swami vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors, 2001 (8) SCC 509 and Election Commission of India vs. Ashok Kumar & Ors., 2000 (8) SCC 216. 13. In the instant case, the election process has already begun and final voter list has also been published, therefore, entertaining this petition at this stage would amount to obstructing the election process, which is not permissible. 14. It is more than settled that Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction can interfere in the matters relating to election only if it subserves the progress of election and facilitates the completion thereof. 15. The present petition filed after commencement of the election process, that too, with a view to stall election, therefore, cannot be entertained, when the petitioner has an alternate efficacious remedy of filing an election petition under Rules. 16. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we find no merit in this petition and the same is accordingly dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. Parties are left to bear their own costs.” In view of above and keeping in view the provisions of Himachal Pradesh Municipal Corporation Election Rules, 2012 as also the commencement of election process, relief prayed for by the petitioners, cannot be allowed to them at this stage. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. It is, however, clarified that dismissal of the 2026:HHC:15700 - 13 - present petition shall not come in the way of the petitioners from seeking appropriate relief for inclusion of their names in ward No.11, Municipal Corporation, Solan, in future in accordance with law. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also to stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge May 11, 2026 R.Atal