Allahabad High Court Restrains State Election Commission From Issuing ULB Polls Notification Till December 20
The Allahabad High Court today further restrained the State Election Commission from issuing Urban Local Bodies' election notification till December 20. The order was made after the UP Government sought a further 3 days' time to file its reply to the query raised by the Allahabad High Court on Monday.Essentially, on Monday, the High Court had asked the UP Government whether, in the process...
The Allahabad High Court today further restrained the State Election Commission from issuing Urban Local Bodies' election notification till December 20. The order was made after the UP Government sought a further 3 days' time to file its reply to the query raised by the Allahabad High Court on Monday.
Essentially, on Monday, the High Court had asked the UP Government whether, in the process of reserving the seats for the purpose of Urban Local Bodies' election, the State Government completed the 'Triple Test' formalities as mandated by the Supreme Court.
The bench of Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Saurabh Srivastava is presently dealing with a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) plea moved by Vaibhav Pandey and other petitioners challenging the State government's notification whereby it sought objections to fixing of quota in the Urban Local Body Elections.
The petitioners are aggrieved with the fact that the UP Government intends to conduct Urban Local Body Elections after reserving 4 mayor seats in the state for Other Backward Classes (OBCs) despite fulfilling the 'triple test' formalities as prescribed in the case of Vikas Kishanrao Gawali v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. LL 2021 SC 13 by the Top Court, to determine the political backwardness of OBCs.
When the matter came up for hearing today, the UP Govt submitted that it needs three days' time to file a counter affidavit. Accepting UP Govt's request, the Court posted the matter for further hearing on December 20 and till then, the SEC has been directed not to issue ULB Polls notification.
This would mean that neither the State Election Commission can announce the poll dates for ULB, nor the state can make a final order reserving 4 mayor seats in the state exclusively for the Other Backward Classes (OBCs).
The case in brief
Essentially, on December 5, the UP Government issued a draft notification announcing the reservation for the seats of mayor in municipal corporations and chairpersons of Nagar Palika Parishad and Nagar Panchayats, wherein, inter alia, it provided that four mayor seats would be reserved for Other Backward Classes (OBCs).
The draft order stated that before making a final order, the state was inviting objections from the general public to the quota allotment from the public within 7 days.
Aggrieved with the same, the Petitioners moved the High Court with the instant PIL plea challenging the draft notification arguing that though the State Government is in the process of conducting the elections for municipalities at various levels in the State of U.P., however for providing the reservation, the mandate of the Supreme Court in the case of Suresh Mahajan vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Another, 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 463 is not being followed as till date the triple test formality has not been completed.
On the other hand, the State argued that the state till now, has only issued a draft order and has invited objections, and thus, anyone who is aggrieved by the said draft order can file their objections, and for this purpose, filing of the instant PIL plea was premature.
It was also argued that if any exercise for a 'triple test' would be undertaken, it will only delay the process of election, which will be against the very concept of the democratic setup of the municipalities.
Our readers may note that in Suresh Mahajan Case, the Supreme Court had held that no reservation for Other Backward Classes can be provided for the purpose of the Urban Body Elections, unless and until the state concerned completes the triple test formalities as prescribed in the case of Vikas Kishanrao Gawali v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. LL 2021 SC 13 to determine the groups' political backwardness.
For context, in the Vikas Kishanrao Gawali case, the Apex Court had noted that a triple test is to be followed before provisioning reservation for the OBC category. The said triple test involves
(1) setting up a dedicated Commission to conduct a contemporaneous rigorous empirical inquiry into the nature and implications of the backwardness qua local bodies, within the State;
(2) specifying the proportion of reservation required to be provisioned local body-wise in light of recommendations of the Commission, so as not to fall foul of overbreadth; and
(3) not exceeding an aggregate of 50 percent of the total seats reserved in favour of SCs/STs/OBCs taken together.
It is essential to note that the Supreme Court has further directed that in case such exercise cannot be completed before issuing the election program by the State Election Commission, seats (except reserved for scheduled castes and scheduled tribes) must be notified as for the general category.
On Monday, having heard the matter, the Allahabad High Court, at the outset, opined that it was essential for the Court to ascertain whether in the process of reserving the seats for the purpose of elections of the Urban Local Bodies, the State Government is following the mandate in the case of Suresh Mahajan (supra) or not.
Therefore, entertaining the petition, the Court had sought State's reply as to whether the 'triple test' had been completed before issuing the draft order on December 5. The Court had also restrained the state from making any final order based on the draft order.
Read more about the December 12 order of the Allahabad High Court here: ULB Polls: Allahabad HC Stays Announcement Of Dates, Asks UP Govt Whether 'Triple Test' Procedure For OBC Quota Completed
Advocates Sharad Pathak and Piyush Pathak appeared for the petitioners
Case title - Vaibhav Pandey vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Urban Development, Civil Secrt. Lko. And Another [PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 878 of 2022]