Delay In Deciding Appeal Against Suspension Of Elected Representatives Defeats Justice: HP High Court
The Himachal Pradesh High Court held that delays in deciding appeals against the suspension of elected representatives defeat the purpose of justice.
The Court further observed that “a growing pattern of suspending elected Pradhans across different parts of the State towards the end of their tenure and noted it to be and raised concerns about it”
Justice Ajay Mohan Goel remarked that “It was expected from the Appellate Authority to decide said appeal as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law. Admittedly, this has not been done, because the appeal is still pending... these tactics of not deciding the case expeditiously defeat the very purpose of filing the appeal.”
On 19th July,2025 the petitioner, Kanto was serving as Pradhan Gram Panchayat, District Chamba, Himachal Pradesh was suspended.
Aggrieved, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Deputy Commissioner, Chamba, under Section 148 of the Himachal Pradesh Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 against the order of suspension.
The appeal was heard on August 21, 2025, and the matter was reserved for final orders on September 4, 2025. However, instead of pronouncing the decision, the reader adjourned the case to December 4, 2025.
Aggrieved by the delay in pronouncing the matter, the petitioner approached the high court, contending that the delay of matter for 3 months was unjustified, especially since her term was expiring in December 2025.
The Court remarked that the order was not pronounced even after reserving the matter, and this demonstrated the insensitiveness of the Presiding Officer.
Further, the Court noted that the date of December 4, 2025, is not a valid date as it was fixed without authority.
Thus, the Court stayed the suspension order and allowed the petitioner to resume her duties.
Case Name: Kanto v/s State of Himachal Pradesh and others
Case No.: CWP No. 15561 of 2025
Date of Decision: 25.09.2025
For the Petitioner : Mr. Naresh Verma,Advocate.
For the respondent : Mr. Pushpinder Jaswal, Additional Advocate General, with Mr. Assistant Advocate General