Supreme Court directs holding of Maharashtra local body polls with OBC reservation before Banthia Commission report
Underlining that the constitutional mandate for democracy at the grassroots level must be 'respected and ensured,' the Supreme Court on Tuesday directed the holding of local body elections in Maharashtra, with OBC reservation set to the percentage which existed before the submission of the Banthia Commission report in July 2022.
A bench of Justices Surya Kant and NK Singh asked the State Election Commission to notify the polls within four weeks and said that efforts be made to complete it within four months. The elections had been held up for some years due to a dispute over OBC reservation.
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…'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News18
an hour ago
- News18
'Undermines Autonomy Of Legal Profession': SC On Cops Summoning Lawyers Over Client Advice
Last Updated: The SC said allowing police or probe agencies to directly summon lawyers for advising clients was a "direct threat" to the independence of justice administration The Supreme Court on Wednesday raised concerns over the probe agencies and police being allowed to summon lawyers for advising clients. It said this can have a 'chilling effect" and would seriously undermine the autonomy of the legal profession. Observing this was a 'direct threat" to the independence of justice administration, a bench of Justices KV Viswanathan and N Kotiswar Singh explained how the legal profession was an integral component of the process of administration of justice. 'Permitting the investigating agencies/police to directly summon defense counsel or advocates who advise parties in a given case would seriously undermine the autonomy of legal profession and would even constitute a direct threat to the independence of the administration of justice," the bench said. The order came when the court was hearing a plea of a Gujarat-based advocate, challenging an order of the high court passed on June 12. The bench framed a couple of questions in the matter and said it directly impinged on the administration of justice 'to subject a professional… when he is a counsel in the matter… prima facie appears to be untenable, subject to further consideration by the court". 'Some of the questions which arise for consideration are: (1) when an individual has a association with a case only as a lawyer advising the party, could the investigating agency/prosecuting agency/police directly summon the lawyer for questioning?" the bench asked. 'Assuming that the investigating agency or prosecuting agency or police have a case that role of the individual is not merely as a lawyer but something more, even then, should they be directly permitted to summon or should a judicial oversight be prescribed for those exceptional criteria?" The bench further said 'what is at stake is the efficacy of the administration of justice and the capacity of the lawyers to conscientiously, and more importantly, fearlessly discharge their professional duties". WHAT IS THE SC ORDER? The SC was hearing a plea of a Gujarat-based advocate, challenging an order of the high court passed on June 12. The high court had refused to quash a notice summoning the lawyer before the police in a case against his client. The top court, however, directed the state not to summon him till further orders and stayed the operation of the police's notice issued to him. The bench also issued notice to the Gujarat government, asking for its response. It noted an agreement was executed in June last year between two persons in a loan transaction. In February, one of them got an FIR registered against the other following which the accused was arrested. The court noted the petitioner before it was engaged as a lawyer by the accused and he moved a bail application on behalf of his client before a sessions court in Ahmedabad. The accused was granted bail. But, a police notice in March summoned the lawyer to appear before police within three days. WHY IS THIS SIGNIFICANT? The issue assumes significance as the Enforcement Directorate (ED) on June 20 directed its investigating officers not to issue summons to any advocate in a money laundering investigation being carried out against their client, adding that exception to this rule could only be made after 'approval" by the agency's director. The ED's statement came in the wake of the lawyer-client privilege linked controversy stemming from its summons to senior SC lawyers Arvind Datar and Pratap Venugopal. The counsel had offered legal advice to Care Health Insurance Limited (CHIL) on the employee stock ownership plan (ESOP) given to Rashmi Saluja, former chairperson of Religare Enterprises. The summons were condemned by the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) and the Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association (SCAORA), calling it a 'disturbing trend" that struck at the very foundations of the legal profession. The bar bodies urged the Chief Justice of India (CJI) to take suo motu cognisance of the matter. Location : New Delhi, India, India First Published: June 25, 2025, 21:57 IST News india 'Undermines Autonomy Of Legal Profession': SC On Cops Summoning Lawyers Over Client Advice
Scroll.in
2 hours ago
- Scroll.in
Assam ‘pushed back' 88 alleged foreigners from Cachar to Bangladesh in a month, says CM
The Assam government has ' pushed back ' 88 alleged 'illegal infiltrators' to Bangladesh from Cachar district in one month, said Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma on Wednesday. Sarma claimed that among persons forced into Bangladesh, 59 are nationals of the country and 29 are Rohingya refugees, who were tracked and identified 'through special operations'. Cachar shares a 32-km-long border with Bangladesh. 'For far too long have illegal infiltrators gone scot free,' the Assam chief minister claimed in a social media post. 'We are tolerating it no more.' For far too long have illegal infiltrators gone scot free. WE ARE TOLERATING IT NO MORE. We have begun intensified operations against illegal infiltrators and in the last 1 month, in Cachar district alone, we have pushed back 88 Bangladeshis and Rohingyas back to Bangladesh. — Himanta Biswa Sarma (@himantabiswa) June 25, 2025 The Assam government has been forcing people over the border into Bangladesh since May. Many of those 'pushed' into the country claim they are Indian citizens. On Sunday, the state police detained 15 persons, including women and children, in Cachar. They were suspected to be from Bangladesh and have since been housed at a temporary detention facility in Silchar, reported India Today NE. Several of the detainees had been living in Gujarat's Surat but came to Assam in a bid to cross back to Bangladesh amid a heightened crackdown on undocumented migrants, the media outlet quoted an unidentified police officer as saying. On June 9, Sarma said that more than 330 persons who were declared to be foreigners by the state's Foreigners Tribunals have been 'pushed' back into Bangladesh. The Foreigners Tribunals in the state are quasi-judicial bodies that adjudicate on matters of citizenship. They have been accused of arbitrariness and bias, and declaring people foreigners on the basis of minor spelling mistakes, a lack of documents or lapses in memory. On May 20, Sarma said that the state was 'duty-bound to protect the interests" of Assam and ' expel all illegal immigrants from the state through any means and as per directions of [the] Supreme Court'. The chief minister appeared to be referring to the court's February 4 ruling that the state must deport persons who had been declared foreign nationals.
Indian Express
2 hours ago
- Indian Express
Karnataka to explore legal options after SC bars water and power supply to buildings without plan sanction
Months after the Supreme Court prohibited water and power supply to buildings not having valid building plan sanction and possession certificates, the Karnataka government is exploring legal options to aid residents who have built houses without obtaining the documents. Addressing a news conference on Wednesday, Deputy Chief Minister D K Shivakumar said the Supreme Court decision would inconvenience the public. 'I have consulted legal advisors on how to help the general public (following the SC directions),' he said. Around 2.5 lakh people in rural and urban areas have constructed houses without the required documents, Shivakumar said, noting that all of them had applied for power and water supply. Some people who constructed houses without these documents have already deposited money with the electricity supply corporations. 'We will collect information on how other states will tackle the issue. In the meantime, people should avoid building houses without building plan certificates,' he said, adding that water and power supply would not be provided to such buildings. On whether the government would bring in the Akrama-Sakrama Bill, which sought to regularise illegal constructions in the state, he said, 'Our government is working towards addressing all problems related to khata documents,' he said.
