1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP Nos. 8187 of 2026 Decided on: 21.05.2026 Rohit 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. R.L.Chaudhary, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General, for respondents No. 1, 2, & 4 to 5. Mr. Surinder Kumar Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.3. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Petitioner feels aggrieved against acceptance of nomination paper presented by respondent No.6 for office of Pardhan, Gram Panchayat, Haroli, District Una, H.P. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner had filed objection on 11.05.2026 with respondent No.5 qua the nomination paper presented by respondent No.6 on the ground that respondent No.6 had encroached upon several parcels of government land. Petitioner had also appended documents in support of his 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 objections. Despite this, respondent No.5 cleared respondent No.6’s nomination, hence, the grievance. 3. In view of remedy available to the petitioner against improper acceptance of nomination under Section 175 of H.P. Panchayati Raj Act by preferring an Election Petition under Section 162 of the Act, this writ petition cannot be entertained in the given facts and circumstances at this stage. It is for the petitioner to seek appropriate remedy for the redressal of his grievance in accordance with law. The present writ petition stands disposed of. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua May 21, 2026 Judge yogesh