The Bombay High Court (Aurangabad Bench) disposed of the writ petitions. The Court condemned the State Election Commission’s last-minute postponement orders but declined to quash them. The Court directed synchronized counting and declaration of all results post 20 December 2025 polling.
The present petition was filed by candidates and voters challenging State Election Commission orders postponing Nagar Panchayat/Nagar Parishad elections scheduled for 3 December 2025 to 20 December 2025 in select constituencies/wards of Bhokar, Basmath, Udgir, Paithan, Kopargaon and Ambejogai Nagar Panchayats/Nagar Parishads. Petitioners sought quashing under Article 226, alleging arbitrary exercise violating Articles 243K, 243ZA and Maharashtra Municipal Councils Election Rules 1966.
State Election Commission announced the initial election schedule on 4 November 2025, which accounted for appeal timelines under Rule 15. After the 25 November 2025 withdrawal deadline passed, District Judges allowed appeals against rejected nominations. The Commission then issued postponement orders just 72 hours before polling to allow withdrawal under Rules 4(3) and 17. Original polling scheduled for 3 December 2025 was shifted to 20 December 2025, fragmenting some wards where certain constituencies proceeded while others postponed.
Petitioners argued that the Commission knew statutory timelines (Rules 4,15,17) yet failed to anticipate appellate delays, rendering postponement arbitrary and ward fragmentation unconstitutional. The State Election Commission defended its action by invoking its superintendence power under Articles 243K and 243ZA of the Constitution to protect candidates’ statutory withdrawal rights.
The Bench comprising Justice Vibha Kankanwadi and Justice Hiten S. Venegavkar held that this power exists but can be exercised only in exceptional circumstances. The Court “formally condemned” the Commission’s last-minute invocation of the power, which lacked administrative foresight. The Court ruled that fragmentation of wards by holding elections in some constituencies while postponing others is impermissible, citing its earlier decision in Rahul S/o Shankarrav Khandagale vs State of Maharashtra and Ors. [1]. The Court mandated uniform declaration of results across all local bodies to prevent the bandwagon effect from influencing voters in the postponed elections.
The Court strongly condemned the Commission’s last-minute exercise of power because delays in appellate decisions were foreseeable under Rules 4(3), 15, and 17 of the Election Rules. The Court declined to quash the postponement orders to avoid derailing the entire electoral process. Instead, the Court regulated the process to ensure fairness.
In result, the Court disposed of the writ petitions without quashing the State Election Commission’s postponement orders. The elections were allowed to proceed according to both the original and revised schedules. However, the Court issued directions to safeguard electoral fairness:
• vote counting and declaration of results is prohibited until after the completion of polling and counting on 20 December 2025.
• results for all Nagar Panchayats and Nagar Parishads across Maharashtra shall be declared together on or after 21 December 2025.
• exit polls are banned until the evening of 20 December 2025.
The Court also directed the Commission to frame and publish guidelines within 10 weeks to address foreseeable contingencies, ensure ward uniformity, and minimize last-minute disruptions. The officers were directed to immediately report any contingencies and seek immediate guidance from the higher authority in any similar instances in the future.
Cases relied on:
1. Subramaniam Balaji v. State of Tamil Nadu, 2013 9 SCC 659
2. Union of India v. Association for Democratic Reforms, 2002 5 SCC 294
3. PUCL v. Union of India, 2003 4 SCC 399
4. Rahul S/o Shankarrav Khandagale v. State of Maharashtra and Ors., 2025:BHC-AUG:33029-DB
Appearances:
Mr. Ram S. Shinde, Advocate for Petitioner in WP/14417/2025
Mr. V.D. Salunke, Advocate for Petitioner in WP/14418/2025
Mr. Ravindra B. Ade, Advocate for Petitioner in WP/14419/2025
Mr. N.P. Patil Jamalpurkar, Advocate for Petitioner in WP/14370/2025
Ms. Shubhangi D. More, Advocate for Petitioner in WP/14373/2025
Mr. V.D.Salunke, Advocate h/f Mr. Mr. Rahul B. Temake, Advocate for Petitioner in WP/14376/2025
Mr. Shrigopal G. Dodya, Advocate for Petitioner in WP/14380/2025
Mr. Sayyed Tausif Yaseen, Advocate for petitioner in WP/14420/2025
Mr. Sachindra Shetye a/w Sharau Dhantare, Akshay Pansare, Advocates for State Election Commission in all Writ Petitions
Mr. S.K. Tambe, Addl. G.P. for Respondents- State authorities
[1] 2025:BHC-AUG:33029-DB
