This is an archive article published on February 14, 2022
Bombay HC seeks poll panel response to plea against BMC delimitation notification
BJP, MNS challenge order issued weeks before Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation’s term is set to end, also wants an HC judge or bureaucrat from another state to be given charge.
Though the petitioners submitted that rules stipulated such an exercise could be undertaken only six months before an election, the court did not stay the delimitation notification but sought to know the commission’s position, after observing that the decision could have been taken under the “special circumstances” of the pandemic.
A division bench of Justice A A Sayed and Justice Abhay Ahuja was hearing a public-interest petition, filed by Nitesh Rajhans Singh of the BJP and Sagar Kantilal Devre of the MNS, challenging the “legality and propriety” of the notification published in the official gazette on February 1. The petition claimed that the notification was arbitrary, arguing that the election commission had not delegated such powers to the corporation.
The corporation published the notification along with maps of the wards and sought public feedback till February 14. As per the notification, the number of wards has increased from 227 to 236, and ward boundaries have been changed. Out of the nine new wards, three wards each increased in the island city, the western suburb and the eastern suburb.
When the bench asked whether the petitioners had filed objections within the stipulated time, they submitted that when the legality of the notification itself was being challenged, the question of filing objections did not arise.
The petitioners argued that while the commission had held in 2005 that delimitation can be done only six months before a local body’s term expires, the February 1 notification was issued when the corporation’s term was set to end in March.
Their counsel further argued that corporation Commissioner Iqbal Singh Chahal, who issued the notification, could not be considered an independent authority because he functioned under the state government, citing that as per the commission’s order on December 29, 2021, local body elections have to be conducted in a “fearless, free and transparent ambience”. The petitioners also submitted that an “independent person” such as a former high court judge or a bureaucrat from another state could have been vested with the powers.
Story continues below this ad
However, the corporation submitted that the commission was an independent entity entitled to take a decision, adding that it had appointed Manoj Saunik to hear the objections and submit a report.
“There was a pandemic. There has to be some special circumstances and concessions. We are not inclined to give any ad-interim relief. In a pandemic, in special circumstances, lots of things have happened and decisions were taken,” the bench orally remarked and asked the commission to file its response at the next hearing, scheduled for February 25.
Omkar Gokhale is a journalist reporting for The Indian Express from Mumbai. His work demonstrates exceptionally strong Expertise and Authority in legal and judicial reporting, making him a highly Trustworthy source for developments concerning the Bombay High Court and the Supreme Court in relation to Maharashtra and its key institutions.
Expertise & Authority
Affiliation: Reports for The Indian Express, a national newspaper known for its rigorous journalistic standards, lending significant Trustworthiness to his legal coverage.
Core Authority & Specialization: Omkar Gokhale's work is almost exclusively dedicated to the complex field of legal affairs and jurisprudence, specializing in:
Bombay High Court Coverage: He provides detailed, real-time reports on the orders, observations, and decisions of the Bombay High Court's principal and regional benches. Key subjects include:
Fundamental Rights & Environment: Cases on air pollution, the right to life of residents affected by dumping sites, and judicial intervention on critical infrastructure (e.g., Ghodbunder Road potholes).
Civil & Criminal Law: Reporting on significant bail orders (e.g., Elgaar Parishad case), compensation for rail-related deaths, and disputes involving high-profile individuals (e.g., Raj Kundra and Shilpa Shetty).
Constitutional and Supreme Court Matters: Reports and analysis on key legal principles and Supreme Court warnings concerning Maharashtra, such as those related to local body elections, reservations, and the creamy layer verdict.
Governance and Institution Oversight: Covers court rulings impacting public bodies like the BMC (regularisation of illegal structures) and the State Election Commission (postponement of polls), showcasing a focus on judicial accountability.
Legal Interpretation: Reports on public speeches and observations by prominent judicial figures (e.g., former Chief Justice B. R. Gavai) on topics like free speech, gender equality, and institutional challenges.
Omkar Gokhale's consistent, focused reporting on the judiciary establishes him as a definitive and authoritative voice for legal developments originating from Mumbai and impacting the entire state of Maharashtra. ... Read More
