Court upheld the legality of municipal ward reservations based on constitutional provisions, emphasizing election process integrity.

JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:

“i) call for the records leading to the identification of reserved wards in the ensuing election to Kalamassery Municipality to be held in 2025;

ii) Issue a writ of certiorari or other order or direction quashing Exhibit P7 Proceedings of the 2^nd respondent to the extent it identifies and declares Ward No.32 as a Ward reserved for Women and all further proceedings pursuant to the same;

iii) declare that the inclusion of Ward No.32 of Kalamassery Municipality as a Ward/seat reserved for Women in the ensuing Municipal Election is illegal, arbitrarily and unconstitutional;

iv) declare that the attempt to include Ward No.32 of Kalamassery Municipality as a reserved seat for women or any other reserved category for the ensuing Municipal Election is illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional;

v) Issue a writ of mandamus or appropriate writ or order commanding the respondents to exclude ward No.32 of Kalamassery Municipality from the reserved seats for Women or any other reserved category for the ensuing Municipal Election;

vi) Declare that Exhibit P1 is illegal, unconstitutional and void;

AND viI) pass such other orders as this Hon'ble Court shall deem just.”[SIC]

2. The main prayer in this Writ Petition is to quash Ext.P7 proceedings of the 2^nd respondent to the extend it identified and declares Ward No.32 of Kalamassery Municipality as a Ward reserved for Women and to declare that the inclusion of Ward No.32 of Kalamassery Municipality as a Ward reserved for Women in the ensuing Municipal election is illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional.

3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Kerala State Election Commission and the learned Special Government Pleader.

4. When this Writ Petition originally came up for consideration before this Court on 16.10.2025, this Court passed the following order:

“Admit. Respective Standing Counsel takes notice for respondents 1 and 3. The learned Government Pleader takes notice for the 2^nd respondent.

After hearing both sides, I am of the considered opinion that; this is not a fit case in which interim order can be passed. The respondents can proceed in accordance with law. But I make it clear that the same will be subject to the result of the Writ Petition.”

5. Thereafter, when the matter came up for consideration before this Court on 31.10.2025, this Court passed the following order: “Read order dated 16.10.2025.

Even though a prima facie case is made out by the petitioner, I am not inclined to interfere with the election in Ward No.32 of Kalamassery Municipality, in the light of the principle laid down in AKM Hassan Uzzaman v. Union of India [ (1982) 2 SCC 218 ]. But I make it clear that the election conducted in ward No.32 of Kalamassery Municipality will be subject to the result of this Writ Petition. ”

6. The above interim order was challenged before the Division Bench of this Court by filing W.A. No.2630 of 2025. The Division Bench set aside the interim order and allowed the petitioners to submit before this Court for an early hearing of the Writ Petition. Accordingly, the Writ Petition again listed before this Court on 07.11.2025. On that day, this Court passed the following order:

“An interim order was passed in this writ petition and the same was challenged before the Division Bench. The Division Bench set aside the interim order and the petitioners were allowed to submit before this Court for an early hearing of this writ pe