1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 7894 of 2026 Decided on: 19.05.2026 Meera Devi …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P & others ..Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. M.A.Safee, Mr. Pranav Kaushal and Mr. Sameer Miyan, Advocates. For the Respondents: Mr.L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General, for respondents No. 1, 3 to 6. Mr. Surinder Kumar Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.2. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. L.N. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General and Mr. Surinder Kumar Sharma, learned counsel, appear and waive service of notice on behalf of respective respondents. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the case file. 3. Petitioner presented her nomination papers for contesting elections for the office of Ward Member, Ward No.2, Gram Panchayat, Jaihar, Tehsil Pachhad, District Sirmour, H.P. Respondent No.6 rejected 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 petitioner’s nomination on 13.05.2026 taking note of “No Objection Certificate” issued by Forest Range Officer on 13.05.2026 certifying that though no case of illegal occupation of forest land had been registered against the petitioner nor any forest crime case was pending against her, however, a case of illegal encroachment on forest land against the petitioner’s husband Sh. Subhash Chand was pending in the court of Divisional Commissioner, Shimla. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed on record clarification/notification dated 08.05.2026 issued by State Panchayati Raj Department. Relevant portion of which reads as under:- “Section 122 (1) (c) of the Himachal Pradesh Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 provides for disqualification where a person or his/her family member “has encroached upon” Government land. The Hon’ble High Court of Himachal Pradesh in CWP No.921 of 2019 (Ram Lal vs. State of HP.) has categorically held that the said provision is to be construed strictly and that disqualification is attracted on the factum of encroachment itself. A reference has also been made by the A.D. to an earlier opinion rendered by this Department, wherein it was opined, with reference to Section 4(5) of the Forest Rights Act, 2006, that persons who had filed claims for recognition of forest rights could not be disqualified under Section 122(1)(C) of the Himahcal Pradesh Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 till such claims were settled. Section 4(5) of the said Act contemplates protection of occupation of forest land pending recognition and verification of rights under the statutory mechanism provided 3 therein. Moreover, the Forest Rights Act is a Central Act and its provisions will prevail over the State Act. In view of the aforesaid statutory protection and the earlier opinion rendered by this Department, it is reiterated that where a person has submitted a claim under the Forest Rights Act, 2006 and such claim is pending consideration before the competent authority, such person shall not incur disqualification under Section 122(1) (C) of the Himachal Pradesh Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 merely on the ground of occupation of such land, till the claim is finally adjudicated in accordance with law. In the opinion of this department, this clarification will also be applicable to those persons, who had earlier applied for regularization of encroachment and had submitted affidavits to this effect in the year 2002. The Forest Right Act was enacted in the year 2006 and has an overriding effect being a Central Act. Further such forest rights have been recognized over other law in force (section 4 of FRA).” Attention was also invited to clarification dated 20.04.2026 issued by Additional Director, Panchayati Raj Department conveying as under:- “In continuation of this office letter of even number dated 02.08.2021 it is to inform you that the law department has opined that Schedule Tribes and other Forest Traditional Forest Dwellers who have already applied for the settlement of claims cannot be disqualified for being chosen as and for being an office bearer of Panchayat under Section 122 (1) (C) of the H.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1994. Therefore, ARO at the time of scrutiny of nomination papers for his satisfactory may ask of the records i.e. copy of claims forms submitted alongwith acknowledgment receipt of Forest Rights Committee to confirm whether the candidate has filed claim under FRA.” 4 Learned counsel for the petitioner on the basis of Annexure P-6 submits that petitioner’s husband Sh.Subhash Chand had submitted his claim qua forest rights to the Forest Rights Committee, Revenue Circle, Village Jaihar and such claim was recommended for acceptance by the Forest Rights Committee vide resolution dated 22.08.2025. The rejection of petitioner’s nomination under order dated 13.05.2026 placed on record by the learned counsel for respondent No.2, makes it apparent that notification/clarification dated 08.05.2026 as also the clarification dated 20.04.2026 and the recommendation of the petitioner’s claim of forest rights by the Forest Rights Committee, Mauja Jaihar, Annexure P-6 which are stated to have been placed on record by the petitioner before respondent No.6, were not considered by him while considering the petitioner’s nomination. 5. For the aforesaid reasons, this writ petition is allowed. The order passed by respondent No.6 on 13.05.2026 rejecting petitioner’s nomination is set-aside. Respondent No.6- the Assistant Returning Officer is directed to consider the petitioner’s nomination afresh in accordance with law inter alia keeping in view the documents mentioned above, by giving opportunity of 5 hearing to the parties if feasible, by 10:00 A.M. on 20.05.2026. All legal consequences shall follow. It is, however, made clear that election schedule notified by respondent No.2 on 29.04.2026 shall not be disturbed in any manner. Needless to add, respondent No.6 shall take a decision uninfluenced by the observations made hereinabove. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua May 19, 2026 Judge yogesh