The Bombay High Court on December 30, 2025, took suo motu cognizance of an order issued by the Municipal Commissioner, Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC), directing staff of subordinate courts in Mumbai to report for election duty, and restrained the civic body from requisitioning judicial staff without the High Court’s approval.
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Ashwin D. Bhobe convened a special sitting at the residence of the Chief Justice at 8:00 pm, noting the urgency of the matter after records were placed before the Court by the Registry earlier in the day.
The Court referred to a decision taken by the Administrative Judges’ Committee of the Bombay High Court in September 2008, under which staff of the High Court and subordinate courts were exempted from election duty, and reiterated that under Article 235 of the Constitution, the High Court exercises complete control and superintendence over the subordinate judiciary, including court staff.
Examining the constitutional and statutory framework, the Bench noted that the State Election Commission derives its powers under Articles 243-K and 243-ZA of the Constitution, and the statutory mechanism for requisitioning staff for election duty is governed by Section 159 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The Court observed that Section 159 does not include the High Court or subordinate courts among the authorities whose staff can be requisitioned for election work, making it clear that judicial staff fall outside the statutory scheme for election-related deployment.
The Court recorded that, without any prior communication or intimation, a letter dated December 22, 2025 were issued by the Municipal Commissioner directing the staff of subordinate courts to report for election duty on December 30 2025. Upon receipt of this communication, the In-Charge Chief Metropolitan Magistrate informed the Collector and the Municipal Commissioner that the High Court had, by a general order dated March 31, 2009, exempted subordinate court staff from election duties, and requested that court staff be exempted accordingly. A similar communication was also issued by the Registrar (Inspection II) on 26 December 2025, enclosing the said general order.
The Bench further noted that despite these communications, a subsequent letter dated 29 December 2025 was issued by the Municipal Commissioner rejecting the request for exemption of subordinate court staff. Though counsel for the BMC sought to withdraw the impugned communication, the Court declined the request and directed the Municipal Commissioner to file a personal affidavit explaining the source of authority under which such directions were issued.
Pending further consideration, the High Court restrained the Municipal Commissioner-cum-District Election Officer from taking any action pursuant to the impugned ex-parte communications, and expressly barred issuance of any future directions requisitioning services of High Court or subordinate court staff for election duty.
The Court directed affidavits to be filed by the Municipal Commissioner, the State Election Commission, the Election Commission of India, and the State of Maharashtra, and posted the matter for further hearing on January 5, 2026, at 11:00 AM.
Appearances
Ms. Jyoti Chavan, Addl. Govt. Pleader for the State.
Ms. Komal Punjabi a/w Mr. Joel Carlos, Advocate for the BMC.
Mr. Sachindra Shetye, Advocate for State Election Commission. Mr. Suryakrishnamurthy, Officer of State Election Commission. Mr. Suresh Kakani, Secretary, State Election Commission, Maharashtra. Mr. Vinod R. Patil, In-Charge Chief Judicial Magistrate, Esplanade, Mumbai.
