In a significant ruling aimed at ensuring timely elections, the Supreme Court of India on Monday firmly rejected a petition that challenged the delimitation process for various local governing bodies in Maharashtra. The apex court made it clear that it would not permit any legal action designed to obstruct the electoral schedule.
Court's Stern Warning Against Delaying Tactics
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi delivered a strong oral observation during the hearing. The bench stated, "We are not going to entertain any plea that could delay the polls." The judges expressed their view that the petitions appeared to be a strategic ploy to postpone the elections for zilla parishads, panchayat samitis, and other local bodies.
This decision reinforces the Supreme Court's earlier directive, which had set a strict deadline of January 31, 2026, for the completion of all local body polls in the state. The court had previously emphasized that no further impediments should be created in the conduct of these elections.
Background of the Delimitation Dispute
The legal challenge was mounted following an order from the Bombay High Court. The High Court had found no illegality in the final decisions taken by Divisional Commissioners (DCs) regarding the delimitation exercise for the districts of Kolhapur, Satara, and Sangli. This was the core issue presented in the petition dismissed by the Supreme Court.
The petitioner, Nikhil K Kolekar, had contested the delegation of powers by the State Election Commission (SEC) to the Divisional Commissioners for approving the final delimitation proposals. The argument put forward was that the power of delimiting electoral constituencies rests exclusively with the SEC under the law, and delegating it to state officials would amount to an abdication of its constitutional responsibility.
Question of Law Left Open for Future
While dismissing the plea to halt the election process, the Supreme Court agreed to keep the broader question of law regarding the delegation of powers open for examination in an appropriate future case. The court noted that there was no specific challenge raised against the original communications through which the SEC and the state government had authorized the DCs to undertake the delimitation task.
The Supreme Court also referenced the September 30 judgment of the Bombay High Court in its reasoning. Meanwhile, similar challenges concerning the delegation of powers in delimitation matters are being heard by a bench of the Bombay High Court, led by Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam Ankhad, with hearings scheduled to continue.
Upcoming Hearings on OBC Reservation
The Supreme Court is slated to take up another crucial set of petitions on January 21. These petitions concern the issue of OBC reservation and the validity of the findings of the Banthia Commission. The controversy stems from the state's decision to allow 27% reservation for Other Backward Classes based on the commission's report, which allegedly led to the total quota in several local bodies exceeding the 50% ceiling mandated by the Supreme Court for reservations in local polls.
The top court's consistent stance has been to prioritize the democratic process, ensuring that elections to local bodies—the foundation of grassroots democracy—are not unduly delayed by protracted litigation.
