Karnataka HC rules in favour of govt, municipal polls to be delayed

The State government gets at least six months' time to consolidate its plans for Bengaluru, on dividing and restructuring, after the High Court rules in favour of the State, as the BBMP Council has been superseded already.

The Karnataka High Court has set aside the order of a single bench that directed the State government to conduct BBMP polls before May 30th, and has directed the State government and the State Election Commission (SEC) to hold the election within six months from the date of dissolution.

With the HC judgment, the State government has got a breathing space to carry out proposed restructuring of the BBMP and conduct the election.

The division bench comprising Chief Justice D H Waghela and Justice Ram Mohan Reddy delivered the judgement on the appeal filed by the State government against the single bench order on BBMP polls, on Friday.

In its verdict, the Court observed that the State government and the State Election Commission have to conduct election as per the 74th amendment of the Constitution. The 74th amendment makes it mandatory to hold an election within six months from the date of dissolving the municipality council.

Court observes half-heartedness in conducting polls

“As noted in the impugned judgment, only half-hearted and delayed measures were taken for holding the election in time and the election programme was not declared even while the appeals were being heard. However, during the hearing of the appeals, government order dated April 18th 2015 was notified to dissolve the BBMP with immediate effect in exercise of the powers of the State government under Section 99 of the Act,” the judgment remarked.

Further, the judgement states, even under changed circumstances, election was required to be held and completed before expiry of six months from the date of notifying dissolution. “Such time limit having been expressly prescribed in the constitution, there was no occasion for any reduction or extension of the period of six months by a judicial order. Therefore, the directions issued in the single bench order has to be set aside.”

The court also rejected an application by the respondent’s counsel, to stay the order for a period of seven days. Meanwhile, respondents in this case – BJP corporators and the State Election Commission, are now left with an option of approaching the Supreme Court questioning the High Court judgment.

Related Articles

HC directs State govt to conduct BBMP polls by May 30th
HC stays declaration of BBMP election temporarily
HC asks State govt to defend diluted planning rules or withdraw

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Similar Story

The real estate shift: How Karnataka’s proposed apartment law shortchanges homeowners

Karnataka apartment owners may not get a fair share of their land as the KAOMA 2026 replaces value-based UDI with an area-only formula.

The Karnataka Apartment (Ownership and Management) Bill, 2026 (KAOMA) changes how a homeowner's share of the land is calculated — and the new formula gives the individual less than what the old law, that is the Karnataka Apartment Ownership Act, 1972 (KAOA), promised. The KAOMA Bill was passed by the Karnataka legislature in August, but is yet to receive assent from the Governor, who has sought clarifications on certain provisions. What is UDI and why does it matter? When you buy an apartment, you buy two things: The flat — a depreciating asset (buildings lose value over time). Your Undivided…

Similar Story

Big promises, unheard residents: Bengaluru’s new parking rules need a rethink

The draft rules meant to manage road space demand end up expanding supply, outsourcing enforcement, and pricing residents out of their streets.

On August 11, the Urban Development Department quietly published the draft Greater Bengaluru Authority (Parking) Rules, 2026 — the legal framework  meant to give teeth to Bengaluru's much-discussed Parking Policy 2.0. Citizens have thirty days to send in objections. Yet, few will read all eighteen pages of the notification. Fewer still will notice that a law framed as a way to curb traffic demand is, on close reading, a plan to expand parking supply and hand over enforcement to private players, while leaving the ordinary resident worse off.  That gap between the promise and what’s on paper matters, because parking…