HC refuses interim relief in 80 pleas challenging GHMC ward delimitation

Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court on Monday, refused to grant any interim orders in a batch of 80 writ petitions filed through lunch motion challenging the preliminary notification on ward delimitation and merger of new wards into the existing Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation boundaries.

The High Court Single Bench comprising Justice Bollam Vijaysen Reddy heard the matter and kept all petitions pending without providing the relief sought by the petitioners.

The legal battle over the ward delimitation process has been unfolding over recent days. On December 19, Justice Bollam Vijaysen Reddy had heard three separate writ petitions that challenged the GHMC Commissioner’s decision to not consider objections submitted by certain parties.

In that hearing, the judge directed the Telangana Government to make ward-wise population data and maps available in the public domain within 24 hours. The petitioners in those three cases were granted liberty to file additional objections within two days of the information being published.

However, the State Government appealed against this single judge order. A Division Bench comprising Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya and Justice Gadi Praveen Kumar modified the earlier direction, restricting the publication requirement to ward-wise details pertaining only to the petitioners in those three specific writ petitions rather than making all information publicly available. During Monday’s proceedings, Advocate General A Sudershan Reddy appeared for the State Government and made strong arguments for dismissing the entire batch of 80 writ petitions at the threshold itself.

He contended that the petitions are not maintainable under Article 243ZG of the Constitution of India, which creates a bar against judicial interference in electoral matters. The Advocate General emphasised that this constitutional provision prevents courts from intervening in such processes.

The Advocate General further informed the court that the delimitation process had been conducted in accordance with established rules and that more than 5,000 objections had been duly considered by the authorities. He detailed that the entire procedure from Rule 1 through Rule 10(5) had been completed and the matter has now been submitted to the government awaiting final approval. He cautioned that allowing these 80 writ petitions would open the floodgates for numerous other petitioners to challenge the process.

After hearing arguments from both sides, Justice Bollam Vijaysen Reddy considered the submissions made by the Advocate General and noted several key factors in arriving at his decision.

The judge observed that the mandated seven-day timeline for the objection process had already expired.

He also took note of the fact that more than 5,000 objections had been examined and considered by the State Government in accordance with the prescribed procedure.

Taking all these circumstances into account, Justice B Vijaysen Reddy refused to pass any interim orders in the 80 writ petitions.

The petitions will remain pending before the court while the delimitation process moves forward toward final government approval. The court’s decision means that the State Government can proceed with the ward delimitation process without any judicial stay at this stage, though the legal challenges will continue to be examined on their merits in due course.