High Court Seeks Response from State Election Commission on PIL Challenging Categorisation of Mayor Posts

High Court Seeks Response from State Election Commission on PIL Challenging Categorisation of Mayor Posts

Ranchi | Legal & Governance News

Headline

Jharkhand High Court has sought a response from the State Election Commission on a petition challenging the state government's decision to classify mayoral posts into two categories for municipal elections.

Sub-headline

The court has directed the state government to file its reply by 17 December.

Main Story

Hearing a petition filed against the Jharkhand government's provision to divide mayor posts into two categories for municipal corporation elections, the High Court on Tuesday asked the state government to obtain a response from the State Election Commission.

A bench comprising Chief Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan and Justice Rajesh Shankar issued the direction while hearing the petition filed by Shantanu Kumar Chandra.

Representing the petitioner, advocate Vinod Kumar Singh argued that the state government has violated constitutional provisions by bifurcating the mayoral posts through an executive order. He stated that such a decision is unconstitutional and should be struck down, as the mayor is a single constitutional post for every municipal corporation and cannot be classified separately for different corporations.

Key Arguments in the Petition

• The petitioner challenged the government's decision to keep the mayor post unreserved in Dhanbad, despite a Scheduled Caste (SC) population of nearly two lakh as per the 2011 Census.

• In contrast, the Giridih mayor post was reserved for SC, even though its SC population is only around 30,000.

• The petitioner said such classification violates constitutional norms and the principle of rational reservation.

The petition also informed the court that the state government has divided nine municipal corporations into two groups:

Category A: Ranchi, Dhanbad

Category B: All other municipal corporations

Municipal elections are being conducted based on 2011 census data, which the petitioner also questioned regarding fairness in reservation policy.

The petitioner argued that the state's reservation method for mayor posts is arbitrary, discriminatory, and unconstitutional.

Court Directive

The High Court directed the state government to file a comprehensive reply after consulting the State Election Commission by 17 December.

Related Stories

• Debate over reservation norms in urban local body elections

• How 2011 Census is influencing civic polls