IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.3661 of 2026 DATE OF ORDER: 06.02.2026 Between:

Kathi Narender, S/o. late Kathi Sayanna ...Petitioner AND The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration & Urban Development Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad & 3 others ...Respondents

ORDER:

This writ petition is filed questioning the action of respondent Nos.2 and 4 in proceeding with the election of the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of Nirmal Municipality by calling upon the MPs, MLAs, MLCs and Rajya Sabha members from the Telangana State to opt for any of the Municipalities as per their choice for becoming the ex-officio members of the said Municipality for the purpose of electing the Chairman and Vice-

Chairman of the said Municipality.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner draws attention of this Court to the newspaper publication issued by Disha on 03.02.2026, wherein, the respondent No.2 stated that notices will be issued and options will be taken for the selection of ex- officio members in the indirect election of the Chairman and Vice-Chairman, which will be held after the Municipal Elections. It is further submitted that on 02.02.2026, the respondent No.4 held a video conference with the District Collectors from Hyderabad and provided guidelines regarding the election of Chairman and Vice-Chairman and also explained that MPs, MLAs, MLCs and Rajya Sabha members, in their ex-officio capacity, will have to choose one municipality and give their option. The respondent No.2 further stated that according to the rules, notices will be issued to the public representatives of the District between 11^th and 14^th of this month.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further draws attention of this Court to the order passed by a Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.20262 of 2021 dated 24.08.2022, while dealing with the vires of Sections 5(3)(b)(c) and 20 of the Telangana Municipalities Act, 2019 (for short “the Act, 2019), the Hon’ble Division Bench observed, which is extracted for reference:

“27. From a conjoint reading of Section 5(3) and Section 20 of the 2019 Act, it is evident that a Rajya Sabha MP or a State MLC, who is not a registered elector / voter within the Municipal Area of the Municipality, can still be nominated as an ex-officio member to the Municipality and cast his vote. This, in our opinion, is clearly contrary to the constitutional mandate expressed through Article 243R of the Constitution. While Article 243R (2) empowers the Legislature of the State to make laws for representation in a Municipality of ex-officio members and also the manner of election of the Chairperson of the Municipality, the law so enacted by the State i.e., the 2019 Act has clearly traversed beyond the limits of the power conferred by the Constitution.”

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that MPs, MLAs, MLCs and Rajya Sabha members shall opt for any of the municipalities as per their choice for becoming ex-officio members of the said municipality after the date of elections and issuing the press publication would be a clear violation of the orders passed by the Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.20262 of 2021.

5. Mr. T.Rajnikanth, learned Additional Advocate General appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3 would submit that press publication is being denied by respondent No.2 and that even going by the press publication, it has been stated that the respondent No.2 – Collector would follow rules and notices will be issued to the public representatives of the District between

11^th and 14^th of this month, which would mean that notices would be given after the date of elections, if at all considering the availability to accommodate the ex-officio members of that particular municipality. Learned Additional Advocate General further submits that since a Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.20262 of 2021, dated 24.08.2022, has already clarif