https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311687 Rule 10 of the Himachal Pradesh Municipal Election Rules, 2015 vested the reservation and rotation process in the Deputy Commissioner, including issuance and publication of the notice, so that function could not be delegated to the Sub Divisional Officer (Civil). The Sub Divisional Officer was not lawfully acting as the Deputy Commissioner for the purpose of Section 18 of the Himachal Pradesh General Clauses Act, and the initial delegation was therefore beyond competence. The Deputy Commissioner was entitled to rescind the unauthorised process and conduct a fresh one, and the cancellation was not shown to be arbitrary, mala fide, or violative of Article 14. The challenge failed and the petition was dismissed. en-us Fri, 18 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 08 Jan 2024 20:47:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311687 Rule 10 of the Himachal Pradesh Municipal Election Rules, 2015 vested the reservation and rotation process in the Deputy Commissioner, including issuance and publication of the notice, so that function could not be delegated to the Sub Divisional Officer (Civil). The Sub Divisional Officer was not lawfully acting as the Deputy Commissioner for the purpose of Section 18 of the Himachal Pradesh General Clauses Act, and the initial delegation was therefore beyond competence. The Deputy Commissioner was entitled to rescind the unauthorised process and conduct a fresh one, and the cancellation was not shown to be arbitrary, mala fide, or violative of Article 14. The challenge failed and the petition was dismissed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 18 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311687