HC upholds Shinde govt’s decision to reverse BMC wards delimitation
The Bombay High Court upheld the decision to reverse the delimitation of wards in the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation by the Maha Vikas Aghadi (MVA) government. The reversal was challenged by former corporators Raju Pednekar and Sameer Desai, but the court dismissed their petitions. The MVA government had increased the number of electoral wards in the BMC from 227 to 236, but the Eknath Shinde government reversed the decision, bringing the number of wards back to 227.
MUMBAI: The Bombay high court (HC) on Monday upheld the decision of the Eknath Shinde-Devendra Fadnavis-led government’s decision to reverse the delimitation of wards in the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation by the Maha Vikas Aghadi (MVA) government by which the electoral wards in the civic body had been increased from 227 to 236.
The reversal was challenged by former corporators Raju Pednekar and Sameer Desai by filing separate petitions. They had stated that the reversal was unconstitutional and would lay waste to the ward delimitation process started by the State Election Commission. The division bench of justice Sunil Shukre and justice Mahendra Chandwani, however, found no merit in the petitions and dismissed the same.
In 2021, the MVA government initiated the delimitation exercise and increased the number of electoral wards in BMC from 227 to 236. However, an ordinance issued by the Eknath Shinde government on August 8 last year reversed the decision, bringing back the number of wards to 227; and the ordinance was replaced by the Act on September 8.
During arguments, Pednekar, a former corporator from the Shiv Sena (UBT) had urged the HC to declare the government’s decision as being unconstitutional, null and void. He also urged that the State Election Commission (SEC) conduct the BMC elections based on the delimitation process it had initiated as per Supreme Court (SC) orders on May 4 and July 20, last year.
{{/usCountry}}During arguments, Pednekar, a former corporator from the Shiv Sena (UBT) had urged the HC to declare the government’s decision as being unconstitutional, null and void. He also urged that the State Election Commission (SEC) conduct the BMC elections based on the delimitation process it had initiated as per Supreme Court (SC) orders on May 4 and July 20, last year.
{{/usCountry}}Senior advocate Aspi Chinoy for Pednekar had submitted said that in February 2022, the HC had dismissed petitions that had challenged the delimitation initiated by the MVA government which increased the BMC wards from 227 to 236. He added that thereafter the SEC had published a final notification in the official gazette based on 236 wards.
{{/usCountry}}Senior advocate Aspi Chinoy for Pednekar had submitted said that in February 2022, the HC had dismissed petitions that had challenged the delimitation initiated by the MVA government which increased the BMC wards from 227 to 236. He added that thereafter the SEC had published a final notification in the official gazette based on 236 wards.
{{/usCountry}}Chinoy had further argued that the September law introduced by the Shinde-led government had proceeded on a legally unsound basis and wrong interpretation of the Supreme Court order of May 4, 2022, which had permitted the conduction of elections based on 236 wards.
{{/usCountry}}Chinoy had further argued that the September law introduced by the Shinde-led government had proceeded on a legally unsound basis and wrong interpretation of the Supreme Court order of May 4, 2022, which had permitted the conduction of elections based on 236 wards.
{{/usCountry}}However, advocate general Birendra Saraf, for the state government, opposed the petitions and submitted that the apex court order of May 4, 2022, and subsequent order were not violated and the decision of the state to reverse the delimitation was in furtherance of the SC orders.
Saraf had further argued that the corporators were decided based on a statute and the number could be increased or changed only after a proper population Census was conducted. He had submitted that as the 2021 Census was not yet conducted the delimitation could not be affected merely on the premise that the population had increased.
The AG further refuted the claim that there was a violation of the SC order and stated that SEC had been permitted to proceed with the election for local bodies based on the ‘delimitation done’ prior to March 11 last year. He added that the delimitation for 236 wards was however not finalised till then, hence elections had to be conducted for 227 wards only.
Advocate Sachindra Shetye, for SEC, had submitted that its May 2022 notification for 236 wards was issued after the SC order. He added that if the number of wards was reduced to 227 based on an Act, SEC had no choice but to conduct elections as per the new law and it would abide by the court order in the present case.
In November last year, advocate Nitin Pawaskar, representing Desai had amended his petition and sought quashing and setting aside the new act.
