Bombay High Court
Mozam Ali Mir vs The State Election Commission, ... on 9 February, 2026
2026:BHC-OS:5650-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (LODGING) NO.769 OF 2026
Mozam Ali Mir .. Petitioner
Vs.
The State Election Commission,
Maharashtra and Anr. .. Respondents
Mr. Pradhuman Chavan, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mr. Akshay Pansare, i/by Mr. Sachindra B. Shetye, Advocates for
Respondent No.1.
Mr. Prashant Kamble, Additional Government Pleader for
Respondent No.2.
CORAM : SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR, CJ. &
GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J.
DATE : 9TH FEBRUARY 2026.
P.C. :
The petitioner has made the following prayers:-
"(A) Issue a Writ of Declaration declaring that denial of polling and the NOTA option in uncontested municipal elections across all Municipal Corporations in the State of Maharashtra, is unconstitutional and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(a) and 21 of the Constitution of India;
(B) Issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to conduct polling and provide the NOTA option even in wards where only one candidate is contesting, across all Municipal Corporations in the State of Maharashtra;
(C) Read down the relevant provisions of the Maharashtra Municipal Corporation Act and in Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 and the rules framed thereunder to the extent necessary to ensure compliance with constitutional mandates; (D) Restrain the respondents from declaring in any Municipal Corporation election, any candidate elected unopposed without conducting polling;
(E) In the alternative, direct the State Election Commission, Maharashtra to frame and notify appropriate guidelines ensuring that voters are afforded an opportunity to participate in municipal elections across all Municipal Corporations in the State of Maharashtra and record dissent in wards where elections are uncontested;
(F) Direct the respondents to reconsider the practice of declaring candidates elected unopposed across all Municipal Corporations in the State of Maharashtra in light of constitutional mandates and the law laid down by the Supreme Court of India;
1/3902-PIL(L)-769-2026.doc Dixit ::: Uploaded on - 05/03/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 06/03/2026 20:44:35 ::: (G) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to take up the present petition on urgent basis and pending final hearing and disposal thereof, pass appropriate interim orders and directions prior to 13th January 2026 including restraining the respondents from declaring any candidate elected unopposed in any Municipal Corporation election in the State of Maharashtra without conducting polling and without providing the option of "None of the Above (NOTA)" and further directing the State Election Commission, Maharashtra to make necessary arrangements to conduct polling in such wards, so that the constitutional rights of voters under Articles 14, 19(1)(a) and 21 of the Constitution of India are not irreversibly defeated by the imminent electoral process scheduled on 15th January 2026.
(H) Pending the final hearing and disposal of the present petition, the petitioner prays that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to:
(i) Stay the declaration of any candidate as elected unopposed in the forthcoming Municipal Corporation elections across all Municipal Corporations in the State of Maharashtra without conducting polling;
(ii) Direct the respondents to make arrangements for polling and provision of NOTA in such wards, across all Municipal Corporations in the State of Maharashtra; (I) Interim and ad-interim reliefs in terms of prayer clauses (A) to (G) above be granted in the interest of justice, equity and good consciences;
(J) Any other and further orders and direction be passed as this Hon'ble Court deem fit as per the facts and circumstances of the case."
2. In a similar matter vide Public Interest Litigation No.4 of 20261, this Court has passed the following order:-
" The petitioner, stating that he is a citizen of India and a public-
spirited activist, seeks a writ of mandamus against the 2nd respondent-Election Commission of India to proceed with the Election Programme published on 15 th December 2025 and declaring the results of Ward Nos.5(A), 14(A), 17(B), 18(B), 18(C) and 18(D) only after a polling and considering the total number of votes of the respondent nos.5 to 10 and NOTA.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner is not seeking any interim direction for staying the elections as scheduled on 15th January 2026. The petitioner is constrained to approach this Court to espouse the cause of other electorates whose fundamental right to vote shall be infringed if polling in the aforementioned Municipal Wards is not conducted. The learned counsel for the petitioner refers to the order dated 6th November 2018 passed by the State Election Commission, Maharashtra and submits that the right of an electorate has 1 Ajay Jeya Murugan Nadar v. State of Maharashtra and Ors. - Order dated 14th January 2026.2/3
902-PIL(L)-769-2026.doc Dixit ::: Uploaded on - 05/03/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 06/03/2026 20:44:35 ::: been considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in "People's Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India" 2. The State Election Commission, Maharashtra made an observation that NOTA shall be treated as a fictional electorate candidate while declaring the election results. It contemplates a situation where all the candidates individually receive lesser votes than the fictional electorate candidate. It also conceives a situation where the contesting candidate and the fictional electorate candidate receive equal valid votes. In the event when none of the contesting candidates is declared elected, fresh elections shall be held from the state of nomination. It has also been observed that on the second occasion, the contesting candidate who secures highest votes excluding NOTA shall be declared as elected.
3. We understand that there is a statutory regime for conduct of the Municipal elections. In addition to that, there are guidelines by the State Election Commission, Maharashtra, as aforesaid. In the circumstances of the case, this writ petition labelled as Public Interest Litigation must be held to be an abuse of the process of law. Seeking a direction to the Election Commission of India, though the Election Commission of India does not conduct Municipal Elections in the State of Maharashtra, to declare results of Ward Nos.5(A), 14(A), 17(B), 18(B), 18(C) and 18(D) after polling and counting of the votes is frivolous. The petitioner who claims that he is associated with Dharmarajya Kamgar-Karmachari Mahasangh, a Labour Union which works for the welfare of the labourers and workers and more particularly Municipal workers does not say that he is espousing the cause of the labourers particularly the Municipal workers. It is settled law, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Ashok Kumar Pandey v. State of West Bengal" (2004) 3 SCC 349, a Public Interest Litigation with vague information should not be entertained. The pleadings in this Public Interest Litigation is a sketchy and casual and warrants imposition of exemplary costs. However, exercising restraint, we refrain from imposing any costs and would simply dismiss Public Interest Litigation No.4 of 2026."
3. Mr. Pradhuman Chavan, the learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, seeks permission to withdraw this Public Interest Litigation.
4. Public Interest Litigation (Lodging) No.769 of 2026 is dismissed as withdrawn.
[ GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J. ] [ CHIEF JUSTICE ] 2 Writ Petition (Civil) No.161 of 2004 - order dt. 29th September 2013 Digitally signed by SNEHA SNEHA 3/3 ABHAY DIXIT ABHAY Date: 902-PIL(L)-769-2026.doc Dixit DIXIT 2026.03.05 16:10:41 +0530 ::: Uploaded on - 05/03/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 06/03/2026 20:44:35 :::