New Delhi, October 16 (Daily Kiran): The Supreme Court on Thursday dismissed the Telangana government’s petition challenging the Telangana High Court’s interim order that stayed the implementation of 42% reservation for Backward Classes in local body elections.
A bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta clarified that the High Court must decide the main case on its merits, without being influenced by the dismissal of the State’s Special Leave Petition (SLP).
During the hearing, Justice Nath questioned Senior Advocate Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for the State, on why the reservation move was not introduced before the election notification. Singhvi replied that the Governor had withheld assent to the Bill, which later became law through “deemed assent” as per the Supreme Court’s ruling in the Tamil Nadu Governor case.
He argued that the reservation law had come into effect without being challenged, yet a stay was granted against it. However, Justice Nath sought clarification on how a Bill could be challenged, to which Singhvi responded that it had already become an Act.
Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, representing the respondents, contended that the government’s move breached the 50% reservation cap and that the “triple test” laid down in K. Krishna Murthy v. Union of India and Vikas Kishanrao Gawali must be met before implementing reservations in local bodies. He noted that the earlier quota distribution was 15% for SCs, 10% for STs, and 25% for OBCs—within the 50% ceiling.
Sankaranarayanan cited previous Supreme Court rulings in Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh cases, reaffirming that local body reservations must not exceed 50%. Another counsel for the respondents added that a State cannot act unilaterally based on “deemed assent,” emphasizing that the Tamil Nadu Governor judgment required seeking a writ of mandamus in case of delay.
Defending the State’s stand, Singhvi maintained that the 50% cap was not an “inflexible rule” and that Telangana had fulfilled all conditions by conducting a detailed socio-economic household survey over a year to justify the enhanced quota.
However, Justice Mehta pointed out that the Gawali judgment did not allow exceeding the 50% limit. Despite Singhvi’s insistence that empirical data supported Telangana’s move, the bench remained unconvinced and dismissed the plea.
My name is Bhupendra Singh Chundawat. I am an experienced content writer with several years of expertise in the field. Currently, I contribute to Daily Kiran, creating engaging and informative content across a variety of categories including technology, health, travel, education, and automobiles. My goal is to deliver accurate, insightful, and captivating information through my words to help readers stay informed and empowered.
