Introduction
In a strong rebuke to the State Election Commission (SEC) of Maharashtra, the Supreme Court of India has directed that all pending local body elections in the State must be completed by January 31, 2026. The order, delivered on September 16, 2025, in Rahul Ramesh Wagh v. State of Maharashtra & Ors, came after the SEC failed to comply with earlier directions to conclude the elections by September 2025.
A Bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi came down heavily on the SEC for citing excuses such as staff shortages, board examinations, and Electronic Voting Machine (EVM) unavailability. The Court held that such reasons were neither new nor unforeseen and that the Commission had failed in its constitutional duty to conduct free and timely elections.
This ruling comes in the backdrop of a long delay in Maharashtra’s local body polls, which have been pending since 2022 due to disputes regarding Other Backward Classes (OBC) reservations and delimitation of wards.
Background: Why Elections Were Delayed
Local body elections in Maharashtra, including polls to 29 municipal corporations, Zila Parishads, Panchayat Samitis, and municipalities, were stalled after the Supreme Court in 2022 stayed elections that did not comply with constitutional mandates on OBC reservations.
While the issue of OBC representation was subsequently resolved, the SEC continued to delay the election schedule. In May 2025, the Supreme Court had given the Commission four months to conclude the elections, i.e., by September 2025. However, when the matter was taken up again in September, the elections had still not been notified.
The SEC sought an extension until January 2026, citing ongoing delimitation, staff unavailability, and EVM procurement as reasons. The Supreme Court, however, found these excuses unjustifiable.
Key Highlights of the Supreme Court’s Observations
1. On SEC’s Delay
The Bench expressed strong displeasure at the SEC’s inaction. Justice Surya Kant asked bluntly:
“Have local body elections taken place or not?”
When informed that delimitation was still underway, the Court remarked that the SEC was unnecessarily restarting the process and delaying elections despite having clear instructions since May.
2. On EVM Shortage
The SEC argued that nearly 50,000 additional EVMs were required. The Court rejected this as an afterthought, observing:
“Are you conducting these elections for the first time? This fact was known to you even on the date when we passed the first order. Your inaction speaks that you are incompetent.”
3. On Board Examinations
The SEC cited upcoming school board examinations as a hurdle, since schools are commonly used as polling stations. Justice Kant dismissed this excuse, noting that:
“When are the board exams? They are usually in March.”
4. On Delimitation
The Court clarified that delimitation could not be a valid ground to hold back elections indefinitely. It directed that the delimitation exercise must be completed by October 31, 2025, with no further extensions.
The Supreme Court’s Order
In its detailed order, the Supreme Court laid down a strict timeline:
- Delimitation exercise for all local bodies to be completed by October 31, 2025.
- SEC to submit staff requirements within two weeks; the Chief Secretary of Maharashtra to ensure deployment of officers within four weeks.
- SEC to make arrangements for EVM procurement and deployment, with a compliance report to be filed by November 30, 2025.
- *All local body elections, including Zila Parishads, Panchayat Samitis, municipalities, and municipal corporations, must be conducted by January 31, 2026.
- No further extensions will be granted under any circumstances.
The Court also permitted the State and SEC to request the Bombay High Court to club pending petitions relating to delimitation and reservation to ensure smoother conduct of elections.
Constitutional and Legal Issues Involved
The Supreme Court’s intervention underscores important constitutional principles:
- Democratic Mandate under Part IX and IXA of the Constitution
- Local self-government is a constitutional mandate under the 73rd and 74th Amendments. Delaying elections undermines grassroots democracy.
- Duty of the State Election Commission
- Article 243K and Article 243ZA vest in the SEC the responsibility to conduct timely local body elections. The Court observed that excuses such as lack of staff or EVMs cannot absolve the Commission of this duty.
- Rule of Law and Accountability
- By holding the SEC accountable, the Court emphasized that constitutional bodies cannot function arbitrarily or disregard judicial directions.
Impact on Maharashtra’s Political Landscape
The Supreme Court’s order will have significant political and administrative consequences:
- Revival of Local Governance: Maharashtra’s urban and rural bodies have been functioning under administrators for nearly three years. Elections will restore democratic control and accountability.
- Political Stakes: With municipal corporations like Mumbai, Pune, and Nagpur going to polls, the elections are expected to shape the political narrative ahead of the 2029 General Elections.
- Strengthening OBC Representation: With the OBC reservation issue resolved, the elections will test how political parties mobilize backward classes at the grassroots.
- Administrative Preparedness: The order compels the State to prioritize election preparedness, ensuring staff deployment, finalization of voter lists, and smooth logistical arrangements.
Past Precedents
The Supreme Court has consistently emphasized the timely conduct of elections:
- Kishan Singh Tomar v. Municipal Corporation of Ahmedabad (2006) – The Court held that SECs must conduct local body elections before the expiry of the term of the existing bodies, and delays are not permissible.
- State of Goa v. Fouziya Imtiaz Shaikh (2021) – The Court reiterated that SECs cannot postpone elections citing administrative difficulties or law-and-order issues.
These precedents reinforce that timely elections are central to maintaining democratic legitimacy.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s directive to the Maharashtra State Election Commission is not just a call for timely polls—it is a reaffirmation of constitutional democracy and the rule of law. By setting a strict timeline and rejecting all excuses, the Court has sent a clear message that the functioning of democratic institutions cannot be compromised due to administrative inefficiency.
As Maharashtra prepares for elections to 29 municipal corporations and numerous rural bodies, the stakes are high. The polls will not only restore grassroots governance but also serve as a testing ground for political parties vying for influence in one of India’s most crucial States.
The January 31, 2026 deadline will be watched closely by citizens, political leaders, and constitutional experts alike. The Supreme Court’s firm stance ensures that the right of people to choose their representatives at the local level is neither delayed nor denied.
Also Read
Supreme Court Upholds Karta’s Power to Sell HUF Property for Daughter’s Marriage Expenses
