The JACWR is not right in demanding that election be held to the Urban Local Bodies with the implementation of 33% reservation to women, basing on the Supreme Court ruling of 5th April 2016, because, the Supreme Court had never ruled so.
The JACWR had filed a Special Leave Petition (No. 26794/2012) and Writ Petition (No. 242/2014) pertaining to the issue of 33% reservation to women in the Urban Local Bodies(ULB) within the State of Nagaland, and also challenging the Nagaland Assembly resolution (dated 22/09/2012) for exempting the operation of Article 243-T (one-third reservation of seats for women in ULB of Part IX-A of the constitution of India) to the State of Nagaland.
The Special Leave Petition of the JACWR granted by the single Supreme Court Judge on the 21st of August, 2011, and its directions thereof, were not sustained by the Division Bench of the Guwahati High Court, and were replaced by the operative directions issued by the Division Bench on the 31st of July 2012. The directions issued by the single judge of the Supreme Court on the Special Leave Petition of the JACWR were then subsumed or included and merged with the earlier impugned stayed judgment passed by the Division Bench of the Guwahati High Court. The Supreme Court, thus converted the Special Leave Petition granted to the JACWR by the single Judge into a Civil Appeal (Civil Appeal No. 3607/2016). This means that the issue of 33% reservation to women in ULB in Nagaland shall only be taken up as any regular matter, and as any regular matter goes, is going to take time before it is finally decided. One should not be surprised if it takes another fifty years or more.
To make it more clearer, since the judgment of the learned Single Judge has been married with the impugned stayed judgment passed by the Division Bench, there can be no confusion to see that the stay on the implementation of the impugned judgment by the Supreme Court cannot operate to revive the Single Judge’s decisions and directions. In short, the Single Judge’s judgment no more stands on its own, and is as much invalid. As such, after the chain of events that has taken place, the assertion of the JACWR that the Supreme Court granting the initial appeal of the JACWR was for holding the Municipal election and implementing the single judge order, is a complete misinterpretation.
The JACWR, in its Writ Petition to the Supreme Court had also challenged the Legislative Assembly Resolution of September 2012, but the Supreme Court has not found it necessary to adjudicate upon the merits of the case, nor passed any directives to the State. As such, it is all upon the State Government to hold Urban Local Body elections at any time of its convenience and will, with or without reservation, or postpone it indefinitely.
One fails to understand why the Chief Minister TRZ is trying to peddle the issue with the JACWR by even offering 25% reservation, when he simply can follow the directives of the Supreme Court and stick to the resolutions of the State Legislative assembly. Allowing the JACWR to hijack the issue without any footing while the Urban Local Bodies in Nagaland lose out on its share of Rs 40 crores is not making any sense whatsoever.
