A division bench of the High Court comprising Chief Justice Lisa Gill and Justice Challa Gunaranjan, which had reserved its judgement on September 16 after hearing petitions challenging the enhanced reservations for OBCs in local bodies, delivered its verdict on Thursday.
The bench said the Naidu government’s decision was contrary to the Supreme Court’s prescribed 50 per cent ceiling on total reservations.
The High Court passed the orders after hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by advocate Tandava Yogesh challenging the two government orders providing 34 per cent reservation for BCs in elections to local bodies.
The bench observed that the government orders could not be sustained in view of the Supreme Court’s judgments on reservations in local body elections.
It asserted that the overall reservation in local bodies should not cross the 50 per cent ceiling and held that the government orders providing 34 per cent reservation to BCs were not legally valid when considered along with the reservations already applicable to other categories.
The High Court also allowed PILs seeking the immediate conduct of elections to gram panchayats and urban local bodies and directed the State Election Commission (SEC) to complete the election process within six weeks.
The court made it clear that the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls could not be cited as a reason to indefinitely postpone local body elections.
The bench also directed the Panchayat Raj and Municipal Administration departments to comply with statutory provisions while dealing with the publication of the final electoral rolls.
The court also dismissed a petition filed by the YSR Congress Party (YSRCP) seeking directions to the State Election Commission to hold local body elections only after completion of the SIR process. The bench did not accept the plea seeking postponement of the elections until the electoral roll revision was completed.
Similarly, the High Court dismissed another PIL seeking completion of the BC enumeration and finalisation of reservations before conducting local body elections. A separate petition seeking sub-classification among BCs for reservation in sarpanch elections was also dismissed.
The High Court also declined to interfere in appeals challenging the order of a single judge, who had earlier refused to intervene in the ward delimitation process. The division bench clarified that a circular issued by the Census Commissioner would have no bearing on the process of ward delimitation.
The High Court further dismissed petitions challenging the Andhra Pradesh Municipalities Amendment Act, 2021 (Act 5 of 2021), which provided for the merger of several gram panchayats with neighbouring municipalities.
The legislation was enacted on June 9, 2021, and the petitioners had questioned the validity of the move to merge various rural local bodies with adjoining urban local bodies.
