Rajasthan HC dismisses contempt pleas, orders local body polls by July 31
Synopsis
The Rajasthan High Court has cleared the state government and Election Commission of contempt — but the relief comes with a hard condition: local body elections must be done by 31 July, no excuses. If the OBC Commission misses its 20 June report deadline, OBC-reserved seats will simply be treated as General category. The court has effectively called the government's bluff.
Key Takeaways
The Rajasthan High Court dismissed contempt petitions against the state government and the State Election Commission on 26 May 2025 .
The Division Bench of Justice Mahendra Kumar Goyal and Justice Anil Kumar Upman ruled the petitions had lost relevance given the revised 31 July 2025 election deadline.
The original deadline of 15 April 2026 was missed, prompting contempt petitions by former MLA Sanyam Lodha and Girraj Singh Devanda .
The OBC Representation Commission has been directed to submit its interim report by 20 June ; failure to do so will result in OBC-reserved seats being treated as General category .
Nearly 439 petitions were heard together when the court first intervened in November 2025 .
The Rajasthan High Court on 26 May 2025 dismissed contempt petitions filed against the Rajasthan state government and the State Election Commission over delays in Panchayat and Urban Local Body elections, while firmly reiterating that all polls must be completed by 31 July 2025. The ruling simultaneously relieves the government from contempt proceedings and places its administrative machinery under renewed judicial scrutiny.
Background: A Long-Pending Electoral Dispute
The matter dates to November 2025, when the High Court — hearing nearly 439 petitions collectively — directed the state government to complete delimitation and ward demarcation by 31 December 2025 and hold elections by 15 April 2026. When the April deadline passed without polls being conducted, former MLA Sanyam Lodha and Girraj Singh Devanda moved the court alleging deliberate non-compliance, prompting the High Court to issue notices to the State Election Commission.
What the Court Decided
The Division Bench comprising Justice Mahendra Kumar Goyal and Justice Anil Kumar Upman disposed of both contempt petitions after concluding they had lost legal relevance in light of a revised deadline already fixed in the main writ proceedings. Since the court had separately set 31 July as the new election deadline, the contempt petitions tied to the earlier 15 April cutoff no longer held ground.
Government's Explanation for the Delay
Advocate General Rajendra Prasad, appearing for the state, submitted that there was no deliberate intent to delay elections. He argued that conducting polls by 15 April became administratively unfeasible, primarily due to a pending report from the Other Backward Classes (OBC) Representation Commission — a prerequisite for determining reservation allocations in Panchayat and local body seats. The government had earlier extended the tenure of the OBC Political Representation Commission, citing the need for reliable data before finalising seat reservations.
The OBC Reservation Factor
The question of OBC reservation remains central to the electoral timeline. In a separate order dated 22 May, the High Court directed the OBC Commission to submit its interim report to the government by 20 June. Critically, the court added that if the Commission fails to meet this deadline, the State Election Commission must still proceed with elections by 31 July — converting OBC-reserved seats to General category for that cycle. This conditional directive effectively removes the OBC report as a potential excuse for further delay.
What Happens Next
With the 31 July deadline now reaffirmed, focus shifts to two fronts: whether the OBC Commission delivers its interim report by 20 June, and whether the State Election Commission can operationalise the electoral process within the remaining window. Any further slippage risks fresh contempt proceedings under the revised timeline, leaving the government with considerably less legal room to manoeuvre.
Point of View
The bench has closed the state government's most reliable escape route. Rajasthan's local body elections have now been delayed long enough that the OBC reservation question — legitimate in principle — risks becoming a procedural shield. The court's conditional order, converting OBC seats to General if the commission misses its June deadline, is a pointed signal that judicial patience has limits.
NationPress
11 Jul 2026
Frequently Asked Questions
Why did the Rajasthan High Court dismiss the contempt petitions?
The court dismissed the contempt petitions because they were tied to the earlier deadline of 15 April 2026, which had since been superseded by a revised judicial deadline of 31 July 2025. Since the original timeline was no longer operative, the contempt proceedings linked to it had no legal basis.
What is the new deadline for Rajasthan local body elections?
The Rajasthan High Court has reaffirmed that all Panchayat and Urban Local Body elections must be completed by 31 July 2025. This deadline was set in the main writ proceedings and has now been reiterated in the context of the dismissed contempt petitions.
Why were the elections delayed in the first place?
The state government cited delays in the OBC Representation Commission's report as the primary reason. Determining OBC reservation in Panchayat and local body seats requires reliable data, and the commission's tenure was extended to gather it, pushing the electoral timeline past the original April deadline.
What happens if the OBC Commission misses its June 20 deadline?
If the OBC Commission fails to submit its interim report to the government by 20 June, the High Court has directed that elections must still proceed by 31 July 2025, with OBC-reserved seats reclassified as General category seats for that electoral cycle.
Who filed the contempt petitions against the Rajasthan government?
Former MLA Sanyam Lodha and Girraj Singh Devanda filed the contempt petitions, alleging that the state government and the State Election Commission had deliberately failed to comply with the High Court's earlier directions to hold elections by 15 April 2026.
