ANSARI FARAHANA ABDUL RAUF Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since the petitioners in both these Writ Petitions are claiming same relief on same set of facts, both the matters have been heard simultaneously and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) Heard. Rule. The Rule is made returnable forthwith. Learned A.G.P. and learned advocate for the petitioners waive service. At the request of both the sides the matters are heard finally at the stage of admission.

(3.) The Petitioners are the candidates elected from their respective wards as councillors in the Janla Municipal Council in election held on 02.12.2016. They are challenging validity of Section 9A of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act 1965 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Municipal Council Act') as amended by the Amendment Act of 2018 which amendment has been brought in operation with effect from 27.09.2018, on the ground that it is ultra virus Article 14 and 243T of the Constitution of India and in the alternative to read it down to the extent of the Petitioners who have obtained certificate of validity as Scheduled Caste under the provisions of the Maharashtra Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, DeNotified Tribes, (Vimukta Jatis) Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special Backward Category (Regulation of issuance and verification of) Caste Certificate Act, 2000, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Caste Certificate Act') within the period of twelve months from the date of their election as councillors.