SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(SC) 1770

A. M. KHANWILKAR, ABHAY S. OKA, C. T. RAVIKUMAR
Rahul Ramesh Wagh – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Hrishikesh Chitaley, Vijay Kari Singh, Kaustubh Kadasne, Chandra Prakash, Devdatta P. Palodkar, Shashibhushan P. Adgaonkar, Rana Sandeep Bussa, Omkar Deshpandey, K. Parameshwar, Kailas Bajirao Autade, Sregurupriya, Sudhanshu S. Choudhari, Mahesh P. Shinde, Rucha A. Pande, Devadatt Kamat, Vatsalya Vigya, Santosh Paul, Vikrant Yadav, G.K. Sarkar, Malbika Sarkar, Anzu. K. Varkey, Bharti Tyagi, Rahul Joshi.
For the Respondents: Anand Dilip Landge, Ajit Kadethankar, A.T. Sanas, Shekhar Naphade, Shyam Divan, C. Aryama Sundaram, Rahul Chitnis, Aishwarya Dash, Kumar Mitakshara, Sachin Patil, Aaditya A. Pande, Geo Joseph, Shreeyash Lalit, Shwetal Pnde, Suhas Kadam, Kailas Bajirao Autade, Sudhanshu S. Choudhari, Bharti Tyagi, Shashibhushan P. Adgaonkar, Randhir Kumar Ojha, Samrat Krishnarao Shinde, Jyoti Thakur, Kishor Kambat.
For the Intervenors : P. Wilson, Arvind S. Avhad, Abhishek Krishna, Hitesh Kumar Sharma, B.A. Wadhmare, S.K. Rajora, Subhash S. Kadam, Abhijit S. Kamble, Shakul R. Ghatole, Firdos T. Mirza, Purshottam B. Patil, Jaikriti S. Jadeja, Prapti Allagh.

ORDER :

W.P. (C) No. 234 of 2022

1. At the request of Mr. Sudhanshu S. Choudhary, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 6, delinked. List this matter tomorrow, i.e. 05.05.2022.

Rest of the cases

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

3. These petitions have questioned the Constitutional validity of the Sections 2, 3, 4(1) (a) and 5 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, the Maharashtra Municipal Corporations Act and Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats, Industrial Townships Act (Amendment) Act, 2022, Sections 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat and the Maharashtra Zilla Parishad and Panchayat Samiti (Amendment Act), 2022 and Section 2 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation (Amendment) Act, 2022.

4. The thrust of the challenge is that under the constitutional scheme, the authority regarding delimitation ought to be with the State Election Commission. That has been taken away owing to the coming into force of the Amendment Acts with effect from 11.03.2022.

5. As regards this main question, deeper examination may be necessary for which these petitions must proceed for further hearing.

6. However, we called upon the learned counsel for the Maharashtra

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top