Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, residents and prospective candidates of Ward No.19 of Sira City Municipal Council, challenged the final notification dated 25-11-2021 issued by the State Government, which reserved the ward for BCA (Woman) in the upcoming municipal elections. The challenge was founded on the allegation that such reservation amounted to impermissible repetition under the State's reservation guidelines, as the ward had been reserved for General (Woman) in the 2013 elections. The petitioners argued that reserving the ward again for a woman category, albeit under BCA, violated the rotation policy and the principle against repeating reservation. The State and the State Election Commission contested this, asserting that the categories were distinct—General (Woman) and BCA (Woman)—and thus no repetition occurred. The Election Commission also highlighted the urgency of concluding local body elections, which had been overdue for three years, and referred to a Division Bench direction mandating completion by 30-12-2021. The court examined the history of reservations for Ward No.19, noting that it was reserved for General (Woman) in 2007 and again in 2013 due to an Apex Court directive, while subsequent notifications were repeatedly quashed by the High Court for various infirmities. On the merits, the court interpreted Clause 10 of the 2012 guidelines, which provide that reservation shall not be repeated 'as far as practicable'. It held that woman is not a distinct category but a gender, and that categories such as General and BCA are separate and distinct. Consequently, reserving the ward for BCA (woman) after it had been General (woman) did not amount to repetition of reservation. The court dismissed the writ petition and upheld the impugned notification, thereby allowing the election process to proceed.
Headnote
A) Municipal Law - Reservation of Wards - Rotation Policy - Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964 read with Guidelines dated 30-08-2012, Clause 10 - Dispute as to whether reserving Ward No.19 for BCA (Woman) after it was reserved for General (Woman) in previous term amounts to repetition of reservation - Held that woman is not a category but a gender; categories are General and BCA, and a change from General (Woman) to BCA (Woman) does not constitute repetition of reservation - Petition dismissed, impugned notification upheld (Paras 10-12)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the reservation of Ward No.19 for BCA (Woman) in 2021 amounts to repetition of reservation in violation of the guidelines, considering the ward was reserved for General (Woman) in 2013
Final Decision
The writ petition is dismissed. The court held that there is no repetition of reservation as woman is not a category but a gender; categories are General and BCA, which are different. The impugned notification dated 25-11-2021 is upheld, and the election process may proceed.
Law Points
- Legal points not extracted
- woman is not a category but a gender
- reservation for woman is not a separate category but a rider on a category
- repetition of reservation for the same category in the same ward should be avoided as far as practicable
- when category changes there is no repetition even if both are for woman
Case Details
2026 LawText (KAR) (05) 35
Writ Petition No.21414/2021 (LB-ELE)
Jayakumar S. Patil (Senior Counsel for petitioners), Mahamad Tahir A. (Advocate for petitioners), Dhyan Chinnappa (Additional Advocate General for respondents 1 and 2), Prathima Honnapura (Additional Government Advocate for respondents 1 and 2), K.N. Phanindra (Senior Counsel for respondent 4), Vaishali Hegde (Advocate for respondent 4)
Mr. Abdulla Khan, Mr. Abdul Karim, Mr. Irfan Khan, Mr. Mohammed Jaffar, Mr. Mohammed Rafiq, Mr. Rahamathulla
State of Karnataka (Urban Development Department), The Deputy Commissioner (Tumkur District), The Sira City Municipal Council (represented by its CEO), The State Election Commission (Karnataka)
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Challenge to the final notification dated 25-11-2021 issued by the State Government depicting reservation for Ward No.19 of Sira City Municipal Council as BCA (Woman), alleging violation of rotation policy and repetition of reservation for woman category.
Remedy Sought
Petitioners sought to quash the notification and prevent repetition of reservation for woman category in Ward No.19.
Filing Reason
Petitioners claimed that Ward No.19 was reserved for General (Woman) in 2013 and now reserved again for BCA (Woman) constitutes repetition of reservation for woman, contrary to the guidelines.
Previous Decisions
Earlier notifications regarding reservation in Sira CMC were quashed by the High Court in Writ Petition No.44499/2018 and connected cases, and in Writ Petition Nos.5886/2021 and connected cases. The Supreme Court had earlier directed that if no new policy was notified, the 2007 reservation notification would apply for the 2013 elections.
Issues
Whether the reservation of Ward No.19 for BCA (Woman) in 2021 amounts to repetition of reservation in violation of the guidelines, considering the ward was reserved for General (Woman) in 2013?
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners contended that reserving Ward No.19 again for a woman category, even if under BCA, violates the guidelines against repetition of reservation, as the ward had been reserved for General (Woman) in 2013.
Respondents argued that the categories General and BCA are different, and reserving for BCA (Woman) after General (Woman) does not constitute repetition. The State Election Commission urged that elections were overdue and a Division Bench had directed completion by 30-12-2021.
Ratio Decidendi
Woman is not a category but a gender; reservation for woman is not a separate category but a rider on a category like General or BCA. Repetition of reservation for the same category in the same ward is to be avoided as far as practicable, but when the category changes from General to BCA, there is no repetition even if both are for woman.
Judgment Excerpts
Woman is not a category, but a gender. Category is either ‘General’ or ‘BCA’.
In the earlier elections what was reserved qua Ward No.19 was General (Woman) and now it is BCA (Woman). If woman is not a category, the categories that are reserved then and now are ‘General’ and ‘BCA (Woman)’ which are altogether different. Therefore, in my considered view there is no repetition of reservation or violence made to the Guidelines.
Procedural History
In 2007, Ward No.19 was reserved for General (Woman). For the 2013 elections, due to an Apex Court direction, the same reservation was repeated. In 2018, a notification again reserved the ward for General (Woman), but it was quashed by the High Court in Writ Petition No.44499/2018 and connected cases. After withdrawal of a writ appeal, a draft notification dated 21-01-2021 proposed BCA, and a final notification dated 16-03-2021 retained BCA; this was quashed by the High Court in Writ Petition Nos.5886/2021 and connected cases on 25-03-2021. A subsequent draft notification on 23-08-2021 proposed BCA (Woman), challenged in Writ Petition No.16999/2021, where the court declined to interfere but directed consideration of objections. The final notification dated 25-11-2021 reserved Ward No.19 for BCA (Woman), which is under challenge in the present petition.
Acts & Sections
- Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964:
- Constitution of India: Articles 226, 227
