Maharashtra Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis Act, 1961

Supreme Court Sets Aside OBC Reservations in Maharashtra Local Body Elections: Vikas Kishanrao Gawali vs. State of Maharashtra (2021) INSC 123 (04 March 2021)

/ A.M. Khanwilkar, Ajay Rastogi, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 243D, Constitutional Law with Article 243T, Election Law, Election Law with Section 12(2)(c), Fundamental Rights, Indu Malhotra, Judges, Maharashtra Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis Act, 1961

Supreme Court Sets Aside OBC Reservations in Maharashtra Local Body Elections LEGAL ISSUE: Whether reservations for Other Backward Classes (OBCs) in local body elections can exceed 50% of the total seats and what are the conditions for providing such reservations. CASE TYPE: Constitutional Law, Election Law Case Name: Vikas Kishanrao Gawali vs. State of Maharashtra […]

Supreme Court Sets Aside OBC Reservations in Maharashtra Local Body Elections: Vikas Kishanrao Gawali vs. State of Maharashtra (2021) INSC 123 (04 March 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies Disqualification for Not Filing Election Expenses: Laxmibai vs. The Collector, Nanded (2020)

/ A.M. Khanwilkar, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 243-O, Dinesh Maheshwari, Disqualification by State Election Commission, Disqualification by State Election Commission, Hemant Gupta, Judges, Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959, Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959 with Section 13, Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959 with Section 14B, Maharashtra Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis Act, 1961, Maharashtra Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis Act, 1961 with Section 15B

Supreme Court clarifies Disqualification for Not Filing Election Expenses: Laxmibai vs. The Collector, Nanded (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the disqualification for not submitting election expenses should be for the maximum period of five years. CASE TYPE: Election Law Case Name: Laxmibai vs. The Collector, Nanded & Ors. Judgment Date: 14 February 2020 Date of the

Supreme Court clarifies Disqualification for Not Filing Election Expenses: Laxmibai vs. The Collector, Nanded (2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Election Process Despite Reservation Concerns: Arun Dokhe vs. State of Maharashtra (2017)

/ A.M. Khanwilkar, Election Law, Judges, Kurian Joseph, Maharashtra Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis (Manner and Rotation of Reservation of Seats) Rules, 1996, Maharashtra Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis (Manner and Rotation of Reservation of Seats) Rules, 1996 with Rule 6, Maharashtra Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis (Manner and Rotation of Reservation of Seats) Rules, 1996 with Rule 9, Maharashtra Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis Act, 1961, Maharashtra Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis Act, 1961 with Section 12, Reservation of Seats, Rotation of Seats

Can the election process be halted due to concerns about the rotation of reserved seats? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question in a case involving the Maharashtra Zilla Parishad elections. The Court ultimately decided not to interfere with the concluded election process, even though there were valid concerns about the reservation of seats.

Supreme Court Upholds Election Process Despite Reservation Concerns: Arun Dokhe vs. State of Maharashtra (2017) Read Post »

Scroll to Top