File photo of Telangana High Court
Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court has expressed surprise over the reservation of Sarpanch and ward member posts for Scheduled Tribes (STs) in villages where there are no ST voters or only a handful of them.
The Court observed that such allocations could undermine democratic values and the very purpose of elections.
Petitions were filed challenging the government’s allocation of reservations for SCs and STs based on 2011 Census data. The cases were heard on Tuesday by Justice T Madhavi Devi.
During the hearing, counsel for the petitioners argued that the government had reserved positions for STs in several villages even though no such community members reside there.
They cited examples such as Warangal district’s Kesamudram mandal Mahmudpatnam village, where only six ST voters live, and Nalgonda district’s Chintapalli mandal Takkalapalli village, which has just eight ST voters, yet both villages have Sarpanch posts reserved for STs.
In Warangal district’s Sangem mandal Vanjarapalli and Nalgonda district’s Anumula mandal Shivalayam Peruru villages, there are no ST residents at all, yet the Sarpanch and ward member posts were reserved for them.
Government’s special counsel defended the decision, stating that all reservations were determined strictly in line with the 2011 Census figures.
After hearing both sides, Justice Madhavi Devi noted that the Constitution guarantees reservations to ensure social justice and adequate political representation for historically marginalised communities.
Citing Articles 243‑D and 243‑T, the judge observed that reservations must be implemented in Panchayats and Municipalities. However, the judge remarked that in several villages where the ST population was negligible or non‑existent, reserving posts exclusively for them could leave positions vacant.
The court further observed that if it were to order alterations to reservations as sought by the petitioners, such directives could disrupt the existing roster system and trigger larger administrative and political consequences.
It could also result in financial loss to the state exchequer without any tangible benefit, the judge noted.
Considering the sensitivity of the issue, the judge directed that the matter be placed before a Division Bench for further examination.
The registry was instructed to list the petitions before the appropriate bench on Wednesday.
This post was last modified on December 3, 2025 7:49 am