The Supreme Court on Monday declined to entertain a petition challenging the Telangana government’s decision to raise the Other Backward Classes (OBC) quota in municipalities and panchayats to 42 percent, taking total reservations in local bodies to 67 percent [Vanga Gopal Reddy v. State of Telangana].
A Bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta allowed the petitioner to withdraw the plea and approach the High Court.
"Counsel for the petitioner, upon instructions, states that he may be allowed to withdraw the petition under Article 32, leaving it open for the petitioner to approach the jurisdictional High Court for appropriate reliefs. The petition is accordingly dismissed with liberty as prayed," the Court ordered.
The plea was filed by Vanga Gopal Reddy challenging the Telangana government’s recent administrative order granting 42 percent reservation to OBCs in local body elections.
Following the order, the State Election Commission on September 29 notified the schedule for rural local body elections, to be held in five phases from October 9 to November 11.
The petitioner contended that the government’s decision breached the 50 percent ceiling on reservations laid down by the Supreme Court in its judgments concerning local body quotas.
During the hearing, Justice Vikram Nath questioned why the matter was being brought before the Supreme Court under Article 32 directly instead of first moving the High Court.
The petitioner’s counsel argued that similar pleas had been entertained by the Supreme Court in the past.
However, Justice Nath pointed out that in comparable cases, the Court had also dismissed petitions, indicating that prior acceptance of such pleas does not automatically justify invoking the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction.
The counsel explained that the High Court had listed the matter for hearing on October 8, but in certain other petitions filed over the same issued, the High Court had denied interim relief.
"The High Court has kept it on the 8th. The reason I have come here, I will explain. On the 26th, they issued notice. On the 28th, some petitioners approached the High Court. The Court refused to stay the matter," he submitted.
Justice Sandeep Mehta noted that merely being denied interim relief by the High Court was not a sufficient ground to invoke Article 32.
“If the High Court doesn’t grant the stay, that means you will come here under Article 32?” he asked.
The petitioner’s counsel then sought liberty to withdraw the petition, which was allowed.
The petition was filed through advocate Somiran Sharma.
[Read Live Coverage]