The Bombay High Court on Tuesday sought responses from the Goa government and the State Election Commission (SEC) regarding two petitions that challenge an ordinance granting the SEC authority to carry out delimitation and reservation for municipal elections. The court has scheduled the matter for final hearing on June 10.
Petition by Trajano D'Mello
One petition, filed by Trajano D'Mello, seeks directions to conduct elections to 11 municipal councils without further delay. The petition states that the councils' terms expired in April 2026 and that the ordinance was promulgated at the eleventh hour, after administrators had already been appointed to run the bodies. It argues that the failure to conduct municipal council elections is a direct breach of Article 243U of the Constitution, which unequivocally requires that elections to constitute a municipality shall be completed before the expiry of its duration.
D'Mello's advocate, Abhijit Gosavi, contended that the ordinance introduces a new procedure for delimitation, reservation, and elections, which could delay the process by at least six months. This, he argued, defeats the mandate of Article 243U.
Separate Plea by Shitesh More
In a separate plea, Mapusa voter Shitesh More, who intends to contest the elections, sought time-bound elections based on the pre-existing delimitation and electoral framework. He has also requested that the ordinance be set aside.
The court has posted the matter for final hearing on June 10, awaiting responses from the respondents.
