1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 7605 of 2026 Decided on: 15.05.2026 Smt. Rosy …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P & others ..Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Jagan Nath, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General, for respondents No. 1 to 5. Mr. Surinder Kumar Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.6. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge At the oral request of learned counsel for the petitioner, State Election Commission through its Secretary, Armsdel Building, H.P. Secretariat, Chhota Shimla, District Shimla, H.P. is impleaded as respondent No.6. Registry to carry out necessary correction in the cause title. Notice. Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, learned Additional Advocate General and Mr. Surinder Kumar Sharma, learned Counsel, appear and waive service of notice on behalf of respondents No. 1 to 5 and respondent No.6, respectively. 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 2. Respondent No.5 rejected the nomination paper presented by the petitioner for contesting the election of Zila Parishad seat reserved for woman belonging to Other Backward Classes (OBC) category from Ward No.11, Bathu, District Una, H.P. Petitioner feels aggrieved, hence, this writ petition. 3. Petitioner’s case is that she was born and brought up in Village Melwan, Tehsil Nangal, District Ropar, Punjab in ‘Bahti’ caste, which is recognized as Other Backward Class in State of Punjab. Petitioner’s marriage was solemnized with one Sh. Surender Kumar, R/o District Una, H.P., who also belongs to same caste i.e. ‘Bahti’. The said caste is recognized as OBC category in State of Himachal Pradesh as well. Other Backward Class certificate was issued to the petitioner by the Competent Authority. Despite this, petitioner’s nomination presented for Zila Parisad, Ward No.11, Bathu, District Una, H.P. was turned down by respondent No.5 primarily on the ground that petitioner is a migrant in the State of H.P. and reservation benefits are state-centric, allowing a migrant to contest a seat reserved for the original residents of Himachal Pradesh would defeat the objective of ‘protective discrimination’ intended for the local backward classes of this State who have faced historical 3 disadvantages within this specific geography. Petitioner’s plea that decisions relied upon for non-suiting her were restrictive in their application only to employment and service matters was held to be untenable. 4. Learned counsel for respondents besides relying upon Subeena Sabri vs. State of H.P. & Ors.2 have submitted that petitioner has remedy of instituting election petition under Section 175(1) (c) of the H.P. Panchayati Raj Election Rules, 1994 against rejection of her nomination. 5. In view of the specific provisions in the Act & Rules, learned counsel for the petitioner, at this stage, seeks permission to withdraw this petition with liberty reserved to avail appropriate remedy, in accordance with law, for redressal of petitioner’s grievances, at an appropriate stage. Granting such permission, the instant petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Pending miscellaneous application(s) if any, to also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua May 15, 2026 Judge yogesh 2CWP No.8043 of 2021 decided on 19.05.2022.