Supreme Court directs holding of Maharashtra local body polls with OBC reservation before Banthia Commission report

In August 2022, the SC had ordered that the status quo be maintained in the matter.

The Jayant Kumar Banthia Commission was set up by the Maharashtra government in March 2022 to examine the question of OBC reservation in the local bodies. The commission recommended 27 per cent representation for the OBCs within the total 50 per cent reservation ceiling.

With the report coming under challenge, the bench said that the polls will be subject to the outcome of the petitions challenging it.

Appearing for a petitioner Tuesday, Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan stressed the need for a study on political backwardness, distinct from social and educational backwardness, to ascertain the need for political reservation. He said the commission had applied reservation automatically to persons in the OBC list without looking into their political backwardness. The senior counsel argued that the Commission had gone with the existing list of OBCs, without fulfilling the ‘triple test’ laid down by the Supreme Court and contended that a separate criterion should apply to ascertain Politically Backward Classes (PBCs).

Justice Kant told Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who appeared for Maharashtra, “Whatever the law you have formulated, wrong or good, you have already identified certain classes of OBCs. Why can’t elections be held as per that law without prejudice to the contentions of the petitioners?” asked Justice Kant.

“Is there any logic? Today, all bureaucrats are occupying all the Municipal Corporations and Panchayats and taking major policy decisions. Because of all this litigation, a complete democratic process has been stalled. Officers have no accountability. Why not allow them to hold the elections as per the present data?” the judge added.

He said, “Suppose whosoever has been declared as OBC, based on that, let the elections be held, subject to the outcome of the proceedings. After all, it is an election for a tenure. Assuming someone has been wrongly included or excluded, inclusion may not be an issue. Exclusion might cause heartburn. Assuming that there is an erroneous exclusion, how is it going to make a difference? They will have an opportunity [next elections]. It is not a permanent election for the whole life.”

Appearing for some of the petitioners, Senior Advocate Indira Jaising said the local body elections in Maharashtra have been “withheld for far too long”. “They are running all representative bodies, right from gram panchayats up to zilla parishads, only through their chosen bureaucrats and taking major policy decisions. So, kindly allow the elections to go ahead,” said Jaising.

Justice Kant pointed out that in the absence of local bodies, bureaucrats were running the show and added, “one of them has, as it appears, started leasing out and auctioning prime properties…”

Mehta, too, agreed with the need to hold the Maharashtra local body elections.