[Reservation In Civic Body Elections] Supreme Court Issues Notice In Plea Challenging Madhya Pradesh High Court's Order Of Staying Reservation Notification

The Supreme Court today issued notice in the Special Leave petition assailing Madhya Pradesh High Court's interim order of staying the notification related to method of reservation in the civic body elections.

The notice was issued by the bench of Justices AM Khanwilkar and CT Ravikumar.

The High Court had stayed the notification dated December 10, 2020 ("impugned notification") to the extent it reserved those offices of Chairperson (Mayor/President) of Municipality (Municipal Council/Municipal Corporation) for SC or ST which were reserved for the same category in the last municipal election of 2014.

Case Before Madhya Pradesh High Court

Manvardhan Singh Tomar had approached the High Court seeking quashing of the notification dated December 10, 2020 issued by the State reserving the offices of President of various Municipal Council and Mayor of Municipal Corporations situated within the State of Madhya Pradesh.

The same was challenged on the ground that all these offices were reserved for the same category (SC or ST) for which it was reserved in the last election i.e. 2014. The public cause raised was that the scheme for reservation in Municipalities as constitutionally provided u/A.243-T though recognized the concept of rotation but had been given a go bye by allowing these offices of President and Mayor of all the Municipalities (including Municipal Corporations) to be again reserved for the same category (SC or ST) for which they were reserved in the last election in 2014.

The bench of Justices Sheel Nagu and Anand Pathak while staying the impugned notification had opined that if the State was allowed to proceed on the basis of notification issued without adopting policy of rotation in terms of Article 243-T then the entire process of election which was yet to commence would render vitiated in law.

"Unless the policy of rotation is followed in respect of all the offices of the President of Municipalities situated in the entire State of Madhya Pradesh before commencement of any subsequent election then, each of the offices of Chairperson situated anywhere in the State of M.P. would be adversely affected. Reason being that if repeat reservation without following mode of rotation is permitted then such offices would be deprived of being represented by non-SC/ST candidates. Correspondingly, the offices which are unreserved shall be deprived of being represented by SC/ST candidates. Thus, the exercise of reservation by adopting the mode of rotation which ought to be carried out before the declaration of the election programme (which has not happened yet) is vital to bring the reservation in line with the object behind Article 243-T or else the entire subsequent election to all the offices of Chairpersons to different Municipalities situated in The State of Madhya Pradesh shall stand vitiated," Court had further added.

The bench had also said that the pendency of this petition would not come in the way of the State of M.P. to work out the reservation afresh of all the offices of Chairperson (President/Mayor) of Municipalities (Municipal Council/Municipal Corporation) by adopting the process of rotation to bring it in line with the mandate of Art.243-T and proceed to announce the election programme to conduct and conclude the elections.

Case Title: State of Madhya Pradesh v Manvardhan Singh Tomar| SLP(C) No. 18358/2021 And The Principal Secretary And Ors. V. Ravi Shankar Bansal| SLP(C) No. 18389/2021

Click Here To Read/Download High Court's Order

Click Here To Read/Download Supreme Court Order