In a dramatic late-night hearing, the Bombay High Court has issued a stern order restraining the Municipal Commissioner of Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC), Bhushan Gagrani, from calling upon staff of the high court and subordinate courts for election duty related to the upcoming civic polls. The court has also directed the commissioner to file a personal affidavit explaining the authority under which he issued such directives.
Urgent Hearing at Chief Justice's Residence
The hearing was convened urgently at the residence of Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar on Tuesday night. A bench comprising Chief Justice Chandrashekhar and Justice Ashwin D Bhobe, sitting during the court's Christmas vacation, assembled around 8 pm to address a suo motu writ petition. This petition was initiated in response to a letter issued by Commissioner Gagrani on December 22, which directly called upon subordinate court staff to report for BMC election duty.
The court's order explicitly stated, "The Municipal Commissioner, BMC-cum-District Election Officer is restrained from issuing any letter/communication to the court staff of High Court or subordinate courts requisitioning their services for election duty." The BMC elections are scheduled for January 15.
Constitutional Authority and Past Exemptions Cited
The bench firmly underscored the high court's constitutional authority over the subordinate judiciary. It referenced Article 235 of the Constitution, which grants the high court complete control and superintendence over subordinate courts, including their staff. The judges highlighted a pivotal decision made by an administrative judges' committee of the high court on September 16, 2008, which explicitly exempted staff of both the high court and subordinate courts from being deployed for election duties.
The court was informed by its registry that Commissioner Gagrani's letter was sent directly to subordinate court staff without any prior communication or approval from the high court. The staff were ordered to report for duty on December 30 between 3 and 5 pm. Following this, the in-charge Chief Judicial Magistrate of Esplanade, Vinod R Patil, reminded the BMC commissioner and district collector about the 2009 decision upholding the exemption. The high court registry also sent a formal communication via email on December 26.
BMC's Refusal and Court's Firm Stand
Despite these reminders, the BMC commissioner, through a letter dated December 29, informed the Chief Judicial Magistrate in Mumbai that the request to exempt the subordinate court staff was declined. When the bench reconvened at 8:45 pm, the lawyer representing the BMC, advocate Komal Punjabi, requested permission to withdraw this December 29 communication.
The high court, however, refused this request. Instead, it directed Commissioner Bhushan Gagrani to file his personal affidavit, along with supporting documents, to clarify the powers under which he assumed the authority to issue such directions to judicial staff. The court reinforced its restraint order, prohibiting him from issuing any further communications to court staff for poll duty.
The bench also referred to a March 2024 order by a coordinate bench, which ruled that election authorities cannot requisition staff of quasi-judicial or judicial bodies. Additionally, it noted a June 7, 2023 communication from the Election Commission of India (ECI) to state bodies, which stated that the prior practice of obtaining high court approval before engaging judicial staff for election work in exceptional circumstances should continue.
During the hearing, K Suryakrishnamurthy, Deputy Secretary of the State Election Commission (SEC), stated that while the SEC is an independent body, it typically does not requisition court staff and follows ECI instructions. The high court has now also sought affidavits from the State Election Commission, the Election Commission of India, and the Maharashtra government. The matter is set for the next hearing on January 5.
