Supreme Court Issues Notice On Plea Seeking Elections In Maharashtra Local Bodies Treating Reservation Above 50% As Open Seats

The Supreme Court recently issued notice to the State of Maharashtra and the Maharashtra State Election Commission on a petition seeking directions for immediate conduct of local body polls in Maharashtra, which have not been held despite a lapse of 506 days since the expiry of the respective local bodies' tenures.The petition seeks directions to immediately conduct elections to the concerned Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis, declare that reservations beyond the 50% ceiling be treated as open category seats, direct that elections under Part IX of the Constitution shall not be postponed on account of constitutionally impermissible reservation structures, and frame guidelines to ensure timely local body elections while adhering to constitutional limits in future.The petition assails the non-conduct of elections to Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis in the State of Maharashtra allegedly on account of reservations exceeding the 50% ceiling limit laid down by the Court in K Krishna Murthy v. Union of India and Vikas Kishanrao Gawali v. State of Maharashtra.A bench of CJI Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana issued notice on a petition filed by Sangram Govindrao Patil, former elected member of the Kusumbe Gat, Zilla Parishad, Dhule.The petition has been filed under Article 32 of the Constitution, contending that the elections have not been held despite expiry of the elected local bodies' tenure on January 16, 2025. It highlights a reservation statement dated October 3, 2025 prepared by the District Adminstration of Dhule Zilla Parishad reserving 41 out of 56 seats. It further states that several Panchayat Samitis were found to have reserved upto 85.71% seats.The petitioner contends that continued non-holding of the local body polls in Maharashtra is in the teeth of the constitutional mandate of periodic democratic governance contained in Part IX of the Constitution.Relying on the judgment in Gawali, the petitioner submits that elections cannot be indefinitely postponed due to reservations disputes and reserved seats in excess of 50% may be treated as Open Category seats to ensure timely elections.It is also the petitioner's case that the relief sought does not pertain to any fresh declaration of law, but rather, implementation of binding law already declared by the Supreme Court.To recap, in the Gawali case (2021), the Supreme Court struck down the 27% OBC reservation given under the Maharashtra Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis Act, 1961 on the ground that it resulted in the breach of 50% cap.In 2022, the Court directed status quo to be maintained qua OBC (Other Backward Classes) reservations in Maharashtra local elections. This meant that the OBC quota could not be implemented for the time being in 367 local bodies where the election process had already been notified.In May 2025, the Court passed an interim order to hold the local body elections in the state (where were deferred since 2022). It was directed that the elections be held as per the OBC reservation which existed prior to the submission of the Banthia Commission report in July 2022. A bench led by Justice Surya Kant (now CJI) directed the State Election Commission to notify the local body elections within four weeks.It was ordered that efforts be made to complete the election process within a period of four months. The Election Commission was given liberty to seek extension of time if needed.In November 2025, the Court came across applications claiming that the reservation in some local bodies was exceeding 50% limit. It observed that the total reservation could not exceed 50% ceiling limit and its May order was seemingly misconstrued by the state authorities. The authorities were asked to not implement reservation in excess of 50%. They were also asked to apprise about the number of municipalities in which the 50% threshold was crossed.Later, elections to certain local bodies were held in the State.Appearance: Senior Advocate Devadatt Kamat, Advocates Rajesh G Inamdar and Shashwat AnandCase Title: SANGRAM GOVINDRAO PATIL v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS., W.P.(C) No. 806/2026Click here to read order

Supreme Court Issues Notice On Plea Seeking Elections In Maharashtra Local Bodies Treating Reservation Above 50% As Open Seats

Debby Jain

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Debby Jain

Supreme Court Issues Notice On Plea Seeking Elections In Maharashtra Local Bodies Treating Reservation Above 50% As Open Seats

Debby Jain

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Debby Jain

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers