The State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by Sec. and Ors. v. K. Balu and Anr.
O R D E R
1. MAs/IAs have been filed by the State of Himachal Pr adesh
seeking parity of treatment with the State of Uttarakhand. In the case of
the State of Himachal Pradesh, this Court by its order dated 31 March
2017 had observed thus:
“26.Insofar as the State of Himachal Pradesh is concerned, we
are of the view that the exemption which has been granted earlier
in respect of areas failing under local bodies with a population of
20,000 will sufficiently protect the interest of the State. No further
relaxation is granted over and above what has already been stated
in that regard.”
2. In the case of the State of Uttarakhand, an order was pas sed
by this Court on 4 August 2017 in MA No. 470 of 2017 in Civil Appeal
Nos 12164-12166 of 2016 ( State of Tamil Nadu v K Balu ) in the
following terms :
“2. Having given our thoughtful consideration to the aforesaid
submission advanced on behalf of the State of Uttarakhand, and
keeping in view the additional affidavit dated 17.7.2017 filed in
this behalf, we are of the view, that the prayer made by the learned
counsel deserves to be accepted for the districts of Utta rkashi,
Chamoli, Rudraprayag, Tehri, Pauri Garhwal, Pithora garh,
Champawat, Bageshwar, Almora. Insofar as district Nanit al is
concerned, it deserves to be extended only to four tehsils – Nanital,
Dhari, Kosya Kutauli and Betalghat, and with respect to district
Dehradun, it deserves to be extended only to three tehs ils -
Chakrata, Kalsi and Tiuni.
673
3. It is clarified, that the concession is not extended to distri cts
Haridwar and Udhamsingh Nagar.”
In view of the order which has subsequently been passed on 4
August 2017 in the case of the State of Uttarakhand, the MAs/IAs filed
by the State of Himachal Pradesh seek parity.
3. Before we can consider the request which has been made on
behalf of the State of Himachal Pradesh, it is necessary that the court
should be apprised of those districts of the State which can be considered
to be hilly areas or hilly districts. Such a course of action was followed
by the court in the case of the State of Uttarakhand befor e, the order
dated 4 August 2017 was passed.
4. We accordingly direct that an affidavit setting out the a bove
particulars be filed within a period of four weeks from t oday. List
thereafter.
Devika Gujral Directions issued.
THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU REP. BY SEC. AND ORS. v.
K. BALU AND ANR.