Himachal Pradesh High Court urges transparency in ward reservation rosters after challenge to Shahpur municipal elections

The petitioner challenged the alleged alteration or fabrication of the 2011 Census figures used for preparing the reservation roster for the elections of Nagar Panchayat/Municipal Council, Shahpur.

He contended that Ward No. 2, Hara, had the highest Scheduled Caste population under the 2011 Census and ought to have been reserved for the Scheduled Caste category in the 2020–21 Nagar Panchayat elections, instead of Ward No. 3, Jhular.

In the 2026 elections, Hara Ward was reserved for Scheduled Caste (Women), thereby allegedly preventing the petitioner, who belonged to the General category, from contesting from that ward.

The State maintained that both elections were conducted on the basis of the 2011 Census, with different base years, and that the reservation roster was prepared according to the Scheduled Caste population of the respective wards.

The records showed that, in both relevant rosters, Hara and Jhular had the highest Scheduled Caste population, and the ward reserved for the Scheduled Caste category was selected on that basis.

The petitioner had not challenged the 2020 reservation roster when the earlier elections were held.

By the time of adjudication, the 2026 Municipal Council elections had already been conducted.

Whether the respondents had fabricated or manipulated the 2011 Census data while preparing the reservation roster for Shahpur Municipal Council elections.

Whether the reservation of Hara Ward for the Scheduled Caste category in the 2026 elections was illegal, particularly when Jhular Ward had been reserved for that category in the previous election.

Whether the petitioner was entitled to quashing of the reservation roster and a direction for preparation of a fresh roster.

Ward reservations must be determined on the basis of the relevant category-wise population reflected in the applicable Census data and reservation roster.

Where the records show that the ward selected for reservation had the highest population of the relevant reserved category, and the petitioner fails to establish manipulation, mala fides, or illegality, the Court will not interfere with the roster.

A challenge raised only after the earlier election, despite the petitioner’s failure to contest the previous roster at the relevant time, is materially weakened.

The Court compared the population figures contained in the two reservation rosters.

For the 2026 roster, Hara had a Scheduled Caste population of 25.63% and Jhular 21.42%; for the earlier roster, Hara was recorded at 15.23% and Jhular at 21.42%.

In both instances, Hara and Jhular were the two wards with the highest Scheduled Caste population.

Since Jhular had been reserved for the Scheduled Caste category in the earlier election, reservation of Hara for that category in 2026 could not, by itself, be treated as unlawful.

The petitioner filed no rejoinder to the State’s population figures and produced no material establishing fabrication, manipulation, or mala fides.

Further, because the petitioner belonged to the General category, he could not have contested from Hara once that ward was validly reserved for the Scheduled Caste category, whether for a male or female candidate.

The Court also declined to disturb the completed election process.

It further held that reservation of Hara Ward for the Scheduled Caste category in 2026 was not liable to interference, particularly as Hara and Jhular had the highest Scheduled Caste populations and the two wards had been reserved in successive elections.

The writ petition was dismissed, and no order as to costs was made; the pending miscellaneous application, if any, was also disposed of.

The Court nevertheless directed the respondents to ensure greater transparency in the preparation and publication of ward reservation rosters so that the basis of reservation could be readily ascertained and speculation avoided.