Maharashtra civic polls to be held in phases after Diwali without VVPAT use: State election commissioner Dinesh Waghmare
Additionally, Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trails (VVPATs) will not be utilised during the polls, he said.
Waghmare made these announcements while in Nashik to assess the preparations of various authorities in the region for the upcoming civic elections.
During a press conference following a review meeting, Waghmare said conducting polls to all civic bodies — municipal corporations, zilla parishads and panchayat samitis, and nagar parishads (municipal councils) — simultaneously is not feasible due to constraints in human resources and other factors.
Consequently, elections to the zilla parishads and panchayat samitis, municipal councils, and municipal corporations will be held in phases after Diwali this year.
However, the sequence of these elections is yet to be determined.
"The ward delimitation process is already underway as per the programme. The ward delimitation for the zilla parishads and panchayat samitis is to be finalised by this month, and the divisional commissioner will conduct the hearing on the suggestions and objections of the voters about the ward delimitation.
Meanwhile, the ward delimitation process for municipal councils and municipal corporations is to be finalised by Sept 30 and Oct 10 this year, respectively," Waghmare said.
When questioned, Waghmare revealed that OBC reservations for the civic polls will also be decided through a draw of lots.
He added that VVPATs will not be employed during the civic polls due to the number of candidates in the four-ward member system and the time required for VVPATs.
Additionally, controlling voter queues during voting would be challenging. "Hence, we will not be using VVPATs during the civic polls," he said.
Waghmare noted the State Election Commission currently possesses approximately 62,000 ballots and control units, and additional units will be needed for the polls. To address this issue, the commission has ordered 50,000 new control units and 1 lakh ballot units from the Electronic Corporation of India Ltd (ECIL), anticipating receipt by the end of Oct.
Furthermore, he mentioned that the State Election Commission has signed an agreement with the Madhya Pradesh State Election Commission to provide 25,000 control units and 75,000 ballot units.
Considering the number of candidates, the commission has decided to allocate 900 voters per polling booth, based on the voter registrations as of July 1. Approval has also been sought from the Election Commission of India to finalise the voter list for the civic polls as of July 1, Waghmare said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India Today
28 minutes ago
- India Today
Next-generation GST reforms will reduce tax burden, boost growth: CEA
Chief Economic Advisor Dr. V Anantha Nageshwaran has said that the proposed overhaul of the Goods and Services Tax (GST) marks a big step forward in India's economic reform journey, building on measures announced earlier this year.'So first of all, the Government of India, before the GST reforms in the budget itself in February, gave a significant direct tax break for middle class households and that will kick in this year,' Nageshwaran told in an interview with India Today other words, the taxes that households, individuals will be paying this year will be much lower than what they paid last year because in the budget significant tax reliefs were extended on the direct taxes side.' He noted that the latest GST measures should be viewed in continuity with recent fiscal decisions. 'So this is coming on top of that. So we should not forget that is a very significant reform measure already announced on February 1 this year,' he highlighted that GST rates have been trending lower over time. 'The weighted average GST rate, if anything over the years has been coming down, if anything from 15% if I am not mistaken down to 11 plus percent, the average rate,' he said. 'GST also has a lot of zero-rated items and a very few items in the 28% category and the number has whittled down over the years.'Calling the current proposal a continuation of the eight-year GST journey, he said, 'This is, we must see this as a sort of a significant move but it is something a continuation of what has been happening over the last eight years of the GST journey.'The CEA stressed that the changes will have far-reaching benefits. 'I think it will definitely reduce the indirect tax burden on items of common consumption and also inputs to businesses,' he said.'So it is going to put more money in the hands of households again in terms of disposable income, will contribute to lower inflation rate which means it also opens up space for central bank to take note of that and it also lowers input cost for businesses at a time when they are facing external uncertainty.'Terming the proposed shift a 'next-generation reform,' Nageshwaran added, 'I think the Prime Minister was very right to label it sort of a next generation reform not just with respect to GST but in terms of the impact it will have on the rest of the economy. And it will be a Diwali gift.'- Ends
The Print
3 hours ago
- The Print
Reform and globalisation — India's dual challenge hold answer to Trump's tariff turmoil
A silver lining in the US tariff imposition is that services have not been included, at least so far. India's services exports are showing greater dynamism than goods exports; in FY25 their value was 89 per cent of goods exports. Thus, services will remain a strong anchor for India's overall export performance. But the bigger lesson goes beyond the short-term hit: the tariffs underscore, once again, India's dual challenge – embracing globalisation more fully, and accelerating long-debated reforms. Since ' Liberation Day ' tariffs were announced by President Donald Trump in April 2025, US tariffs have become a moving target. As of 1 August, India faces 'reciprocal tariffs' of 25 per cent and, from 27 August onwards, an additional penal tariff of 25 per cent. We estimate that as a result of these tariffs, India's annual exports to the US – currently almost a fifth of the country's goods exports – could decline by $19 billion to $35 billion. Some labour-intensive sectors, such as textiles and apparel, diamonds, and shrimps, would be especially vulnerable. Punitive tariffs imposed by the US on India will hurt. Yet two truths stand out. First, India cannot afford to forsake or even downplay globalisation, as some have suggested. Second, the policy responses needed to mitigate the damage are the very reforms that India should be pursuing, regardless of the tariffs. On globalisation, India is still a lower middle-income country. Sustained growth and the goal of Viksit Bharat 2047 requires India to leverage the global economy in its entirety, embracing the upsides and managing the downsides. Yet India's high tariffs, frequently called out by Trump, reflect India's ambivalence about full engagement with world markets. Policymakers should remember that India's best growth years were accompanied by dynamic export performance. Exports enable companies to expand beyond the domestic market (mobile phones being a case in point), and enjoy competition-driven productivity growth. Imports provide cheaper products and inputs, and enable technology upgrading. Finally, note that all the high-performing East Asian economies have achieved much higher peak trade-to-GDP ratios than India, whose 2024 ratio of 45 per cent stands far below its own peak 2012 trade ratio of 56 per cent. Also read: Tiruppur orders on hold, pressure to sell cheap, Diwali fears—Trump tariff & Tamil Nadu hub Reforms India must push for This brings us to reforms, without which India cannot fully benefit from globalisation. The agenda is not new, but the urgency is greater than ever. In a recent CSEP Working Paper, co-authored with Prerna Prabhakar, we proposed a core agenda for revitalising manufacturing competitiveness. This includes: 1) Rationalising India's tariff structure to better align with East Asian competitors. Current high tariffs raise input costs and bias firms towards the domestic market. According to the latest WTO data, the simple average tariff in 2024 on all products was 7.5 per cent for China, 16.2 per cent for India, and 9.5 per cent for Vietnam. 2) Hastening the completion of free trade agreements (FTAs) with the EU, and deepening existing ones with ASEAN, Japan, and South Korea. Unlike its Asian peers, India is not part of any mega-regional trading bloc. New and deeper FTAs will help diversify markets and reduce dependence on a single market. China provides a striking example: in the wake of the US-China trade war, it increased total exports by more than a trillion dollars, even as the US' share in its export basket fell from about 20 per cent to 10 per cent over the past six years. 3) Enhancing the quality of regulations that impede firm growth, complicate land acquisition, and inhibit efficient urbanisation. Labour laws, for example, create a disincentive for firms to grow, creating a very lopsided industrial structure, wherein medium and small enterprises form 96 per cent of industrial units in India. 4) Fostering technological development through a holistic approach that recognises the core role of competition in spurring research, adaptation and innovation. Moving from lower-middle-income to high-income status will require increasing innovation to accompany investment and technology diffusion. India invests just 0.6 per cent of GDP on R&D, compared with 2.4 per cent in China and 1.2 per cent in Thailand. Dire economic prognoses – and crises in particular – often provide the political space for difficult reforms. India should use the current trade upheaval to push through some crucial reforms, while also managing the short-term fallout of lost or cancelled orders. The current scenario is by no means all doom and gloom. Even if punitive US tariffs persist and exports to the US take a sizeable hit, services exports remain buoyant. Goods exports can find alternative destinations, and India has some fiscal space to provide targeted support for this process. Trade and economic partnerships can also be widened. Most importantly, domestic reforms – which will have a much bigger long-term impact on India's exports and overall growth – can be accelerated. India can convert the tariff turmoil into an opportunity to position itself as the world's go-to trade partner. It has the scale and heft to back this ambition — all it needs is the boldness to embrace it. Sanjay Kathuria is co-founder of the Trade Sentinel, a visiting senior fellow at the Centre for Social and Economic Progress, visiting professor at Ashoka University, and nonresident senior fellow at the Institute of South Asian Studies. His X handle is @Sanjay_1818. TG Srinivasan is co-founder of the Trade Sentinel, and visiting senior fellow at the Centre for Social and Economic Progress. His X handle is @tgsv. Views are personal. (Edited by Prashant) Also read: Thank you Trump for putting tariff gun to India's head. That's the only way we'd be forced to reform
Indian Express
4 hours ago
- Indian Express
Why Centre is considering ‘equivalence' in application of ‘creamy layer' condition in OBC quota
The government is considering ways to ensure 'equivalence' in the application of the 'creamy layer' condition in reservation for Other Backward Classes (OBCs) across a range of jobs at central and state government organisations, public sector enterprises, universities, etc. A proposal has been prepared after consultations among several government ministries and departments, and bodies such as NITI Aayog and the National Commission for Backward Classes (NCBC), The Indian Express reported last week. The concept of 'creamy layer' In its landmark verdict in Indra Sawhney vs Union of India (1992), the Supreme Court upheld the government's decision to implement the recommendations of the Mandal Commission, but said that affluent sections among the socially and educationally backward classes, the so-called 'creamy layer', must be excluded from job quotas. Thereafter, on September 8, 1993, DoPT issued a circular identifying the creamy layer that would be ineligible for OBC reservation. Sons and daughters of high constitutional functionaries, and government, PSU, and armed forces officers were included in the list, along with 'professional class and those engaged in trade and industry', and 'property owners'. An 'income/ wealth test' was also mentioned. Specifically, an individual either of whose parents was a direct recruit to a Group A/ Class I government job, or if the parent was promoted to Group A before the age of 40, was not eligible for the OBC quota. An individual both of whose parents were direct recruits to Group B jobs would be part of the creamy layer. Children of armed forces officials only up to the rank of Lieutenant Colonel could avail of the quota. For those outside the government sector, the income ceiling was set at Rs 1 lakh per annum. It was subsequently revised upwards, and the limit has been Rs 8 lakh since 2017. However, income from salary and agricultural income is not included. 2004 'clarification' and after The above criteria were not comprehensive, especially with regard to jobs outside the government sector. So, on October 14, 2004, DoPT issued detailed 'Clarifications regarding creamy layer amongst OBCs' in order to determine 'the creamy layer status of sons and daughters of persons employed in organisations where equivalence or comparability of posts vis-à-vis posts in Government has not been evaluated'. It was determined that: 'Income of the parents from the salaries and from the other sources (other than salaries and agricultural land) is determined separately. If either the income of the parents from the salaries or the income of the parents from other sources (other than salaries and agricultural land) exceeds… Rs 2.5 lakh per annum [which was the creamy layer income ceiling for private persons at the time] for a period of three consecutive years, the sons and daughters of such persons shall be treated to fall in creamy layer…' However, these 'clarifications' were not widely implemented to deprive individuals of reservation benefits during the UPA years (2004-14), as the government sought to woo OBCs in pursuit of various social justice goals. In late 2014, DoPT started examining caste certificates issued by various authorities to determine their compliance with the 2004 'clarification'. Between the Civil Services Examinations (CSE) of 2015 and 2023 (batches of 2016-24), DoPT rejected caste certificates of more than 100 successful candidates who would have qualified as OBC under the September 1993 criteria, but who were put in the creamy layer in accordance with the new criteria. Interestingly, many of these individuals have appeared in other competitive examinations, and have been considered OBC on the basis of the same caste certificate. Efforts to find 'equivalence' The unresolved case of the more than 100 candidates determined by DoPT as being in the creamy layer led to consultations among various stakeholder ministries. While 'equivalence' has been established with regard to the various central PSUs, the process remains pending for others — and the sons/ daughters of a wide range of employees are put in the creamy layer based on their incomes, thanks to 'clarification' issued in 2004. In June this year, Home Minister Amit Shah and NCBC chairman Hansraj Ahir recommended to the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment that the policy under consideration should be implemented retrospectively so that these more than 100 candidates are also able to benefit. Views of the Ministries of Social Justice, Education, Law, and Labour, the Department of Public Enterprises and DoPT, as well as NITI Aayog and NCBC were sought in the matter. According to sources in the government, some of the issues in the proposal to establish 'equivalence' are: * Since the salaries of university teachers from assistant professor upward typically start from 'Level 10', which is equivalent to entry-level Group A posts in the government, it has been proposed that children of university teachers be categorised as creamy layer. *For central/ state autonomous and statutory bodies, it is proposed to establish 'equivalence' with central government officials, depending on their level/ group/ pay scale, which is aligned with the corresponding pay in central and state governments. * Non-teaching staff of universities are proposed to be placed in the creamy layer depending on their level/ group/ pay scale. * It is proposed that all executive-level positions in state PSUs be treated as creamy layer, akin to the 'equivalence' that has been in force for central PSUs since 2017. However, it has been proposed that executives whose income is within Rs 8 lakh — which is the ceiling for private persons — will not be categorised as creamy layer. * It is proposed that employees of government-aided institutions, which usually follow the service conditions and pay scales of the central or respective state government, be placed under appropriate categories based on the 'equivalence' of their post and service conditions and pay scales. The likely beneficiaries If the proposals are implemented, sons/ daughters of lower-level government employees with annual salaries of more than Rs 8 lakh are likely to benefit the most. It will correct the anomaly by which children of government teachers get the benefit of OBC quota, but children of employees of similar rank at government-aided institutions are denied on the basis of income. A similar situation exists in several state government organisations. In one of the cases before the government, the children of an individual who fills fuel in vehicles at a pump run by a state-owned oil marketing company have been declared creamy layer on the basis of income. Not much is expected to change for children of employees in the private sector. Sources in the government said it is noted in the proposal that it is difficult to establish 'equivalence' given the vast range of positions, pay, and perquisites in private employment, and creamy layer can be determined based on the income/ wealth criteria. The income ceiling was revised in 2004, 2008, 2013, and 2017.
