During the proceedings, the petitioner’s counsel argued that the GO is unconstitutional since it breaches the 50 percent reservation cap.
Published Sep 28, 2025 | 9:43 AM ⚊ Updated Sep 28, 2025 | 9:43 AM
The Telangana High Court. (Official website)
Synopsis: The Telangana State Election Commission has decided to issue the notification for local body elections despite a petition filed in the Telangana High Court challenging the issuance of a government Order hiking Backward Class reservations to 42 percent. The court noted that even if the notification is issued, it would proceed to examine the petitions on their merits
The Telangana State Election Commission (SEC) is understood to have decided to issue the notification for local body polls on Sunday, 28 September, despite a petition filed in the Telangana High Court challenging the issuance of a government Order (GO) hiking Backward Class (BC) reservation to 42 percent.
As the high court did not per se strike down the GO, the SEC reportedly decided to proceed with the electoral process even as the case hearing progresses. The high court gave the SEC until 6 October to convey its decision, while adjourning the next hearing to 8 October.
The SEC was in the midst of preparations for the local body polls on Sunday when the high court heard arguments against the Government Order (GO) that raised BC reservations from 37 percent to 42 percent.
According to the petitioner, this increase pushes the total quota of reservation to 67 percent — well above the 50 percent ceiling mandated by the Constitution as well as the Telangana Panchayat Raj Act, 2018.
The case was heard as a house motion before a division bench comprising Justices B Vijaysen Reddy and Abhinand Kumar Shavili. The petition was filed by B Madhava Reddy, a resident of Kesavapur in Medchal-Malkajgiri district.
During the proceedings, the petitioner’s counsel argued that the GO is unconstitutional since it breaches the 50 percent reservation cap. He further pointed out that the Panchayat Raj Act, 2018, explicitly fixes the limit at 50 percent, and the government’s decision to raise BC quotas disregards these statutory safeguards.
The bench also inquired whether similar policies had been adopted elsewhere, citing Tamil Nadu, where BC reservation had reached 69 percent. The petitioner clarified that Tamil Nadu’s hike had been enabled through an amendment placed under the Ninth Schedule of the Constitution, though even that provision is currently under review by the Supreme Court.
The state’s Advocate General (AG) informed the bench that a bill amending Section 285-A of the Panchayat Raj Act, 2018, is currently pending approval before the Governor. This disclosure prompted the judges to question how the government could issue the GO while the legislative process remained incomplete. The AG sought two days to convey the government’s final position.
The court also sought clarity from the SEC on whether it would delay the issuance of the election notification until 6 October. The bench noted that even if the notification is issued, the court would proceed to examine the petitions on their merits, since they had been filed before any formal announcement of elections by the State Election Commission was made.
After hearing the arguments, the bench adjourned further hearing to 8 October and issued notices to the government for its response.
(Edited by Muhammed Fazil.)
