A division bench led by the High Court Chief Justice has stayed the State Election Commission’s notification that had postponed the vote counting for the municipal elections in Kichha and Siraulikalan (Udham Singh Nagar district).
The Court questioned why the counting of votes had been halted after the polling had already taken place. Following this High Court decision, the path is now clear for vote counting in both municipalities, and the State Election Commission is expected to issue a new notification regarding this.
On Thursday, the division bench comprising Chief Justice Manoj Kumar Gupta and Justice Alok Mehra heard a petition filed by Alina Malik, a resident of Kichha. Alina had contested the election for the post of councilor from Ward No. 7 of the Kichha municipality.
The Commission had issued a notification on September 7 outlining the entire schedule, from the nomination process to the vote counting. According to the original schedule, polling was held on September 22 and counting was slated for September 24; however, the Commission subsequently issued a revised notification.
The petitioner argued that issuing a revised notification after the election notification had already been released and polling had concluded was contrary to the law. While hearing the matter, the Court stayed the revised notification and directed the government and the State Election Commission to file their responses within two weeks.
During an earlier hearing before a single-judge bench, the State Election Commission had stated that polling for both municipalities would be conducted on September 22, a schedule for which a notification had already been issued. However, the counting of votes—scheduled to follow the polling—had been postponed until further orders.
Grounds for the petition filed before the single-judge bench:
Naeem-ul-Shan and Mohammad Rafiq, residents of Kichha, had initially challenged a provisional notification issued by the Uttarakhand government on April 24, 2025. Subsequently, on May 19, 2025, the state government notified the Siraulikalan area as a separate municipality—a move challenged by the petitioner on the grounds that, since the area was already part of the Kichha Municipality, separating it violated the standards set forth in Article 243-Q of the Constitution.
The petitioner contended that constituting Siraulikalan as a separate municipality violated the High Court’s previous orders and an existing interim stay order, under which Siraulikalan retains its status as part of the Kichha Municipality. A challenge has also been raised against the notifications issued by the State Election Commission on September 7, 2026, which announced a schedule for holding separate elections in Kichha and Siraulikalan.
It was argued that conducting elections by treating Siraulikalan as a separate municipality violates Section 3(1)(2) and Section 9A (rotational reservation rule) of the Uttarakhand (Uttar Pradesh) Municipalities Act, 1916.
