Bombay HC seeks SEC, state govt’s reply to pleas over delimitation, reservation of wards for local bodies
The court, however, clarified that its direction seeking responses shall not be construed as if the election authorities and government cannot proceed with the election process for local bodies.
The petitioners also raised issues related to Schedule 5 of the Constitution and argued that the state government shall have no powers to extend the amended law to the scheduled areas.
The Bombay High Court on Friday sought affidavits from the State Election Commission (SEC) and the Maharashtra government in response to pleas related to reservation of wards and delimitation of various municipal corporations including Thane, Vasai-Virar and Mumbai.
The court, however, clarified that its direction seeking responses shall not be construed as if the election authorities and government cannot proceed with the election process for local bodies. However, it said the actions taken by authorities will be subject to the outcome of the petitions.
A bench of Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam A Ankhad was hearing a batch of pleas raising issues related to delimitation exercise, reservation of wards based on categories and challenging validity of certain election rules.
The petitioners referred to a past Supreme Court order related to delimitation exercise conducted by the SEC prior to amendment in laws made before March 2022 and said the apex court did not pass any direction to modify the effective date to consider the said exercise. The petitioners also raised issues related to Schedule 5 of the Constitution and argued that the state government shall have no powers to extend the amended law to the scheduled areas.
However, on the other hand, the state government opposed the pleas and referred to the May 6 and September 16 orders of the Supreme Court. The government argued that the SC had ordered the elections for local bodies in Maharashtra to be conducted and completed before January 31, 2026. It was argued that as the notification of election for certain local bodies has been issued by SEC, the pleas were not maintainable and same be dismissed.
“While fixing such a deadline, the Supreme Court issued certain directions to the SEC and such directions issued by the Supreme Court are related to preparation for conducting elections and the conclusion of the elections on or before the deadline fixed by the Supreme Court. Having regard to the rival submissions made on behalf of the rival parties, we are inclined to grant a short time for filing reply affidavits by the contesting respondents,” the HC noted in its order.
Seeking reply affidavits by November 24 by respondent authorities followed by rejoinders from the petitioners, the HC posted further hearing to November 27 for final disposal of the pleas.
Story continues below this ad
“We would further indicate that this order passed by this court, having taken cognizance of the writ petitions, in as much as the direction has been issued to the respondents to file the reply affidavits, shall not be construed as if the Election Commission or the state government shall not proceed with issuance of notice, preparation for conducting elections of all local bodies within the stipulated time,” the HC noted in its order.
“However, we may further indicate that all actions taken by the respondents shall be subject to the outcome of these writ petitions,” the court said.
The HC earlier this week had dismissed pleas seeking various reliefs including transfer of names in the voters’ list, challenging short time granted to object to the draft voters’ list, absence of names in the list despite applying online for the inclusion among others.
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
