2026:HHC:37158 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No. 6786 of 2026 Decided on : 01.09.2026 Reena Devi and others …Petitioners Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others …Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge Hon’ble Mr. Justice Yogesh Jaswal, Judge Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioners : Mr. Vikrant Thakur, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Sushant Vir Singh Thakur, Mr. Shubham Singh Guleria and Ms. Shivani Priya, Advocates For the respondents : Mr. Pushpinder Jaswal and Mr. Sushant Keprate, Additional Advocates General, for respondents No.1, 3 to 5. Mr. Surender Sharma, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Neeraj Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.2- State Election Commission. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral ) By way of this writ petition, the petitioners have inter alia prayed for the following reliefs:- 1Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2026:HHC:37158 “(i). Issue a writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside the impugned communication/clarification dated 02.05.2026 (Annexure P-1), whereby Asha Workers have been declared disqualified from being chosen as office bearers of Panchayati Raj Act, 1994;and (ii). Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction declaring that Asha Workers, being voluntary and incentive-based functionaries engaged under the National Health Mission, do not fall within the ambit of “service” or “employment” under Section 122 (1)(g) of the Act and are, therefore, not disqualified from contesting Panchayati Raj elections.” 2. The challenge herein is to Annexure P-1, which is a communication/clarification dated 02.05.2026, which renders Asha Workers disqualified for being chosen as an office bearer of a Panchayat under Section 122(1) (g) of the Himachal Pradesh Panchayati Raj Act, 1994. 3. A perusal of the record demonstrates that the Hon’ble Coordinate Bench in terms of order dated 06.05.2026 stayed the operation of the communication/clarification under challenge. The Court has been informed that out of the seven petitioners, three petitioners, namely, Reena Devi, Chandresh Kumari and Kamla Devi, contested the election successfully. 4. In the light of the fact that this Court had stayed the 3 2026:HHC:37158 operation of the impugned clarification dated 02.05.2026 on 06.05.2026 and as a result thereof, the petitioners participated in the election process and three of them have been successful also, we are of the considered view that on account of this subsequent developments, it would not be in the interest of justice to go into the merits of this case and quietus can be put to the present proceedings, by observing that the candidates who have contested the elections successfully, shall be allowed to complete their respective tenures in terms of the Panchayati Raj Act, of the office, to which they stand elected. 5. As prayed for, it is further ordered that issue raised in the present petition is kept open and it shall not be construed that any adjudication has been made by this Court on the legality of the communication/clarification dated 02.05.2026 (Annexure P-1) either way. This Court observes that as this order has been passed in the peculiar facts of the case, where three out of the seven petitioners have successfully contested the elections, therefore, this order shall not be treated as a precedent. The petition stands disposed of in above terms. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, 4 2026:HHC:37158 also stand disposed of accordingly. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge (Yogesh Jaswal) Judge September 01, 2026 (meera)