IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.1760 of 2026 Decided on: 26th February, 2026 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Madan Thakur …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Rahil Mahajan, Advocate. For the Respondents: Ms. Seema Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents No.1 to 5. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge This writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive prayers:- “A. Issue appropriate writ, order or direction thereby quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 23.07.2024 (Annexure P-12) passed by the Director, Panchayati Raj, Himachal Pradesh; B. Issue appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents to give effect to the order dated 19.03.2024 passed by respondent No.2 (Annexure P-11), whereby respondent No.6 was declared unseated/suspended and disqualified from the post of Ward Member of Gram Panchayat Dheera; C. Declare that respondent No.6 stood disqualified from contesting and holding the post of Ward Member on account of concealment of material facts and encroachment over Government land and further 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 restrained him from contesting panchayat election which are going to held shortly; D. Direct the respondents to decide the petitioner’s representation dated 14.08.2025 within a stipulated time frame, in accordance with law.” 2. The impugned order was passed by the Director Panchayati Raj to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, allowing an appeal preferred by respondent No.6, inter alia, holding that “it would not be appropriate to disqualify an elected member of the Gram Panchayat based on a report of Tehsildar Dheera where the date of removal of encroachment has not been categorically ascertained and mentioned. The ascertainment of date of removal of encroachment is important since the disqualification period of 6 years runs from the date of ejectment or cessation of encroachment.” In view of the factual position recorded in the impugned order, the matter was remanded by the Director Panchayati Raj, Himachal Pradesh to the Deputy Commissioner, Kangra for proper inquiry after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties. 3. The order impugned was passed on 23.07.2024. It created certain rights in favour of the parties, more particularly respondent No.6 and obligations to be discharged by the concerned authorities. More than a year and six months have passed from the date of passing of 3 impugned order. Petitioner’s prayer for setting aside the impugned order at this stage, therefore, cannot be countenanced. Accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed alongwith pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua February 26, 2026 Judge Mukesh