The Telangana High Court on Wednesday dismissed a writ petition challenging the state government’s decision to allocate 42 per cent reservation to Backward Classes (BCs) in the upcoming local body elections. Justice K Lakshman, while dismissing the petition as “premature and not maintainable”, stated that the petitioners relied solely on newspaper reports and their petition was “based on apprehensions”.
“Except for a paper statement, there is no other proof. It is an absolutely premature petition,” the judge stated, adding that the petitioner’s apprehension was not justifiable.
The petition filed by Buttemgari Madhava Reddy was related to the reservation of seats for backward classes in the local body elections, a matter that, he claimed, had been widely reported in several newspapers. The petitioner contended that the state government’s move to increase reservations for Backward Classes (BCs) in the panchayat elections to 42 per cent would push the total quota beyond the 50 per cent ceiling. They said the proposal to raise the reservation was unconstitutional.
The existing quota in Telangana stands at 26 per cent for BCs, 15 per cent for Scheduled Castes, and 9 per cent for Scheduled Tribes, totalling 50 per cent, as mandated under Section 285A of the Telangana Panchayat Raj Act, 2018.
However, during the court proceedings, the petitioner was unable to produce any official government proceedings or orders to substantiate the claims. Advocate General A Sudarshan Reddy, representing the state, confirmed that no government orders or public proceedings have been issued regarding the 42 per cent reservation for Backward Classes in the local body elections.
The court noted that the petitioners failed to file any relevant government order (GO) or any official proceedings related to the reservation that they wished to challenge. The court further noted that the principle of not taking cognizance of newspaper articles was established by the Supreme Court in the landmark George Fernandez vs. Union of India case. “This court can’t take cognizance of news items published in newspapers,” the judge declared.
The court dismissed the petition and advised the petitioner that they would be at liberty to challenge any official proceedings or government orders if and when they are issued.
