News Desk, Amar Ujala, Bhopal
Published by: Ravindra Bhajani
Updated to Friday, 17 December 2021 4:45 PM IST
The Supreme Court has stayed the conduct of elections to the seats reserved for OBCs in the panchayat elections in Madhya Pradesh. The Supreme Court has directed that OBC seats be notified as General seats.
– Photo: Amar Ujala
Listen to the news
The Supreme Court has banned reserved seats for OBCs in connection with the panchayat elections in Madhya Pradesh. The apex court issued the directions on a petition filed by the Madhya Pradesh State Election Commission seeking stay on the election notification issued on December 4 regarding OBC seats. The bench comprising Justices AM Khanwalkar and CT Ravikumar directed the state election commission to notify the general category of seats reserved for OBCs in local bodies.
The bench said the OBC reservation notification was against the Supreme Court decision of Vikas Kishanjirao Gawli v. Government of Maharashtra. The bench said that the OBC quota was similarly implemented in the local body elections in Maharashtra and the Supreme Court stayed it.
This is the order
The bench comprising Justice Khanwalkar and Justice CT Ravikumar said, “In the notification of local body elections in Madhya Pradesh, 27% of the seats were reserved for OBCs. This reservation is against the recent Supreme Court decision regarding Maharashtra. We are directing the State Election Commission to suspend the election process reserved for OBC seats in all local bodies.” Those positions should be notified back to the General category. ”
Awaiting High Court decision on Ordinance
Vivek Tanka, senior counsel for the petitioner, said that the High Court had given a January date for hearing on the petition filed against the ordinance issued on November 21, 2021. The apex court said the matter was being heard in the high court. The election results will be revealed after the final decision is taken. The bench said the situation was similar in Maharashtra. Elections are also allowed in Maharashtra. Elections were later canceled. We will allow you to amend your petition in the High Court and seek relief.
The State Election Commission reprimanded
The tribunal stated that you should correct your mistake immediately. Do not listen to the government. Do what the law says. Do so if the election is taking place in accordance with the Constitution. We do not want to hurt taxpayers’ money. We do not want the state election commission to do anything at the whim of someone else. I do not want any confusion in this matter. The public will also be wasted if elections take place. You worry about him.
The Supreme Court said not to play with fire
Dissatisfied with the notification, the tribunal asked the state election commission not to play with fire. You need to understand this situation. Do not make decisions based on political commitments. Is the pattern different for each state? India has a single constitution and so far there is only one Supreme Court. He said no experiment should take place in Madhya Pradesh and a Maharashtra-style decision should be taken there as well. Then public money will be wasted.
This is the case
The decision was taken in the case of Manmohan Nagar v. Madhya Pradesh State Election Commission. Petitioners Madhya Pradesh Ordinance no. 14/2021, Madhya Pradesh Panchayati Raj and Grama Swaraj (Amendment) Act, 2021 challenged. In this, provisions have been made regarding reservations and delimitation in panchayat elections in Madhya Pradesh. Congress leaders Syed Zafar and Jaya Thakur, in their petition, said the ordinance was against the basic spirit of the Panchayat Election Act. This is a violation of constitutional provisions. This is contrary to the rotational system. The ordinance should be repealed for this reason.
The Gwalior bench on December 7 refused to grant interim relief on the petition. Following this, Madhya Pradesh High Court Chief Justices Ravi Malimat and Vijay Kumar Shukla on December 9 refused to grant interim relief. Following the issuance of interim orders by the Associate Bench, the High Court held that fresh issuance of orders was contrary to judicial discipline. The petitioners then approached the Supreme Court. On December 15, the Supreme Court allowed the petitioners to amend their application for interim relief in the High Court on December 16. The Supreme Court has said that the notification of elections dated December 4, 2021 has not been challenged in the High Court.