THE Supreme Court on Tuesday observed that the final results of elections in Maharashtra for 57 local bodies, where 50 per cent ceiling on quota has been breached, will depend on its judgement in the case. The observations were made by a bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi while deferring to November 28 the hearing on the issue of reservation in local body elections. The Maharashtra Government, represented by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, sought time to consult the state election commission (SEC) regarding compliance with the 50 per cent ceiling on quotas.

 

Earlier on November 19, the bench had asked the State Government to consider deferring the process of nomination for local body elections till the issue of grant of 27 per cent reservation for the Other Backward Class (OBC) is adjudicated uponby it. On Tuesday, the bench wasinformed by senior advocateBalbir Singh, appearing for theSEC, that elections to 242 municipal councils and 42 nagar panchayats, a total of 288 bodies, have already been notified forDecember 2. The senior lawyer said in 57 of these bodies, the 50 per cent reservation cap stands breached.

 

Taking note of this, the benchsaid the reservation exceeding 50per cent in the already-notified57 bodies would remain subjectto the final outcome of the ongoing proceedings. At the outset, the Solicitor General sought anadjournment to allow time forconsultations with the SEC. Senior advocate Vikas Singhargued that previous orders, including a July 2022 directionby a three-judge bench led by Justice A M Khanwilkar approving the Banthia recommendations, had created confusion.

 

The law officer said the state authorities acted under a“bona fide interpretation” of the court’s orders. Senior advocate Indira Jaising, while not opposing the adjournment, informed the bench that some petitioners have also moved a contempt petition, essentially challenging the May 2025 order. Supporting the existing notified reservation structure, she contended that elections already underway should not be halted and stressed that the court had earlier made the poll process subject to judicial outcome.

 

The CJI remarked that if elections were ultimately found to be illegal, the court had the power to set them aside. “If elections are held contrary to law, they can be annulled,” the CJI said. Vikas Singh, however, argued that such annulment would lead to waste of public funds and pressed for pausing the electoral process. Senior advocate Narender Hooda described the 50 per cent upper limit as a constitutional “Lakshman Rekha”.