2026 Supreme(Online)(Jhk) 546

HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND
Sujit Narayan Prasad, J
Santanu Kumar Chandra – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
W.P. (C). No. 7296 of 2025

States possess legislative competence to determine reservation policy for municipal chairpersons under Article 243-T. Sub-categorizing municipalities based on objective demographic data to implement population-based reservation, while maintaining systemic ceilings, constitutes a valid exercise of power that does not violate constitutional equality.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Articles 14, 15(4), 16(4), 243-Q, 243-T, 243-ZA - Jharkhand Municipal Act, 2011 - Section 27 - Reservation policy - Rotational versus population-based reservation - The State has the constitutional power under Article 243-T(4) to provide for the manner of reservation for the office of Chairperson. Sub-classification of urban local bodies into distinct categories for the purpose of reservation, supported by empirical data and recommendations from a dedicated commission to ensure adequate representation and compliance with the 50% reservation ceiling, is constitutionally permissible and does not violate the principle of equality. (Paras 66, 102, 111, 114)

(B) Judicial Review of Subordinate Legislation - Scope - Courts should proceed with caution before declaring subordinate legislation invalid. Presumption of constitutionality exists, and a rule can only be challenged on grounds of legislative incompetence, violation of fundamental rights, or inconsistency with the parent statute or constitutional objects. (Paras 89, 91, 92)

Facts of the case:
A petition was filed challenging the classification of municipal corporations into two groups and the subsequent determination of reservation for mayoral posts. The petitioner contended that the denial of reservation for a specific community, despite having the largest population in the region, was arbitrary and violative of the constitutional mandate. It was further argued that administrative sub-categorization of municipalities lacked legislative sanction and violated the requirement for a population-based rotation policy.

Findings of Court:
The court held that the legislature is empowered to define the manner of reservation for the office of Chairperson. The classification into groups was based on objective criteria, specifically identifying major metropolitan areas to ensure balanced representation while strictly adhering to the 50% reservation ceiling mandated by settled legal principles. The abandonment of the rotational system in favor of one based on population descending order, as provided by the amended parent Act, is a valid exercise of legislative power.

Issues: (i) Whether the sub-categorization of municipal corporations for reservation purposes is ultra vires to the Constitution. (ii) Whether the abandonment of the rotational reservation system in favor of a population-based model is legally permissible. (iii) Whether legislative debates can override the express provisions of an enacted statute.

Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that delegated legislation is valid when it conforms to the object and scheme of the parent Act and constitutional mandates. The state acted within its authority by implementing recommendations from a dedicated commission to perform a triple-test exercise, ensuring that reservation policies remain within the constitutionally permissible limits and do not exceed the 50% ceiling.

Result: Writ petition dismissed.

Table of Content
1. adjudication on interlocutory application for intervention in municipal election reservation matter. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7)
2. factual matrix regarding dhanbad municipal corporation's reservation claim based on population. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28)
3. petitioner challenges sub-classification and lack of sc reservation as unconstitutional and arbitrary. (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45)
4. state justifies classification based on triple-test criteria and supreme court direction. (Para 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54)
5. interpretative framework of constitutional and statutory provisions governing municipal reservations. (Para 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 , 70 , 71 , 72 , 73 , 74 , 75 , 76 , 77 , 78 , 79 , 80 , 81 , 82)
6. subordinate legislation held valid; population-based criteria deemed constitutional and consistent with statutory mandate. (Para 83 , 84 , 85 , 86 , 87 , 88 , 89 , 90 , 91 , 92 , 93 , 94 , 95 , 96 , 97 , 98 , 99 , 100 , 101 , 102 , 103 , 104 , 105 , 106 , 107 , 108 , 109 , 110 , 111 , 112 , 113 , 114 , 115 , 116 , 117 , 118 , 119 , 120 , 121 , 122 , 123)
7. rotation policy replaced by population-based reservation; writ petition dismissed for lack of merit. (Para 124 , 125 , 126 , 127 , 128 , 129 , 130)

I.A. No. 474 of 2026

1. The instant Interlocutory Application has been filed by one Irshad Ahmad, to intervene in this writ petition for adjudication of the matter of reservation in Mayor/Chairman Post in Giridih Municipal Corporation.

2. It is stated that intervener-petitioner belongs to [Other Backward Class] OBC category living in the township of Giridih where population of OBC Category is larger than another category i.e., 65.24% as per census of 2011. It is further stated that earlier, prior to 2016, Giridih Township was in „Municipality Area‟ and now it became „Municipal Corporation‟ where the post of Mayor/Chairman was reserved for the SC Category and again reserved for the same which is contrary to the law that the post of Mayor/Chairman should be rotational.

3. It is further stated that as per the notification dated 16.10.2025 the Mayor post of Giridih Municipal Corporation is reserved for SC Category which is contrary to the Jharkhand Municipal Act, 2011 (herein after referred to as „Rule 2012‟) and for this issue one writ petition i.e. W.P. (C) No. 324 of 2018 (Md. Anwar Ali vs. State of Jharkhand and others) was filed wherein it is specifically mentioned that the post of Mayor will be rotational.

4. It is further stated that the intervener-petitioner is bona fide resident of Giridih and claiming himself as an OBC Category whose population is larger than all other category, and the seat of Mayor was reserved for SC Category in the election of 2016 and again reserved for SC Category, which is against the principles of natural justice.

5. On the aforesaid backdrop, prayer has been made to allow the instant interlocutory application filed for intervention in writ petition making the intervener a necessary party so that interest of the intervener be saved.

6. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents did not raise objection so far prayer for intervention in the instant writ petition is concerned so that the issue be set at rest. However, he has opposed to the contentions made by learned counsel for the intervener-petitioner on the merit of the matter.

7. In view of the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the instant intervention application being I.A. No.474 of 2026 is hereby allowed only to the extent that intervener will be treated as necessary party to the present lis.

Prayer in W.P. (C) No.7296 of 2025

8. The instant writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following reliefs:

“I.Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appr

Click Here to Read the rest of this document