Supreme Court Upholds Delhi High Court's Order Dismissing Plea Challenging Rotation Of Wards For Reserved Categories In Upcoming Municipal Polls

Update: 2022-02-26 05:20 GMT
story

The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed the Special Leave Petition filed by Manoj Kumar Jha challenging Delhi High Court's order of dismissing plea challenging notification issued by the State Election Commission changing the seats reserved in some wards under the General and Scheduled Caste category, for the upcoming municipal elections on the basis of descending order of percentage...

Your free access to Live Law has expired
Please Subscribe for unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments, Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.

The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed the Special Leave Petition filed by Manoj Kumar Jha challenging Delhi High Court's order of dismissing plea challenging notification issued by the State Election Commission changing the seats reserved in some wards under the General and Scheduled Caste category, for the upcoming municipal elections on the basis of descending order of percentage of population.

The bench of Justices SK Kaul and MM Sundresh while dismissing the SLP in their order said, 

"We are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. The Special Leave Petition is accordingly dismissed. Pending application stands disposed of."

Through the impugned reservation notification dated 25 January 2022, it was announced that 46 of the total of 272 wards in the three civic bodies are reserved for SC candidates, including women, while 114 general category seats have been kept for women candidates.

The Division Bench comprising of Justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice Jasmeet Singh noted that relied reservation and rotation of seats for SC/ST members in municipal seats was not prohibited under Article 243T(1) of the Constitution.

The Court further noted that the power for rotation for the seats reserved for Scheduled Castes in different wards is vested upon the Central Government, and the delegation of this power to the State Election Commission (via a 1993 notification) has not been challenged.

Advocates Arun Maitri, Rabin Majumder, Radhika Chandrashekhar and Akansha Srivastava appeared for Jha. 

Case Title: Manoj Kumar Jha v. State Election Commission| Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 2615/2022

Click Here To Read/Download Order


Tags:    

Similar News