top of page

By:

Quaid Najmi

4 January 2025 at 3:26:24 pm

Seventy-six mayors ruled BMC since 1931

After four years, Mumbai to salute its first citizen Kishori Pednekar Vishwanath Mahadeshwar Snehal Ambekar Sunil Prabhu Mumbai: As the date for appointing Mumbai’s First Citizen looms closer, various political parties have adopted tough posturing to foist their own person for the coveted post of Mayor – the ‘face’ of the country’s commercial capital. Ruling Mahayuti allies Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and Shiv Sena have vowed that the city...

Seventy-six mayors ruled BMC since 1931

After four years, Mumbai to salute its first citizen Kishori Pednekar Vishwanath Mahadeshwar Snehal Ambekar Sunil Prabhu Mumbai: As the date for appointing Mumbai’s First Citizen looms closer, various political parties have adopted tough posturing to foist their own person for the coveted post of Mayor – the ‘face’ of the country’s commercial capital. Ruling Mahayuti allies Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and Shiv Sena have vowed that the city will get a ‘Hindu Marathi’ person to head India’s richest civic body, while the Opposition Shiv Sena (UBT)-Maharashtra Navnirman Sena also harbour fond hopes of a miracle that could ensure their own person for the post. The Maharashtra Vikas Aghadi (MVA) optimism stems from expectations of possible political permutations-combinations that could develop with a realignment of forces as the Supreme Court is hearing the cases involving the Shiv Sena-Nationalist Congress Party this week. Catapulted as the largest single party, the BJP hopes to install a first ever party-man as Mayor, but that may not create history. Way back in 1982-1983, a BJP leader Dr. Prabhakar Pai had served in the top post in Mumbai (then Bombay). Incidentally, Dr. Pai hailed from Udupi district of Karnataka, and his appointment came barely a couple of years after the BJP was formed (1980), capping a distinguished career as a city father, said experts. Originally a Congressman, Dr. Pai later shifted to the Bharatiya Janata Party, then back to Congress briefly, founded the Janata Seva Sangh before immersing himself in social activities. Second Administrator The 2026 Mayoral elections have evoked huge interest not only among Mumbaikars but across the country as it comes after nearly four years since the BMC was governed by an Administrator. This was only the second time in the BMC history that an Administrator was named after April 1984-May 1985. On both occasions, there were election-related issues, the first time the elections got delayed for certain reasons and the second time the polling was put off owing to Ward delimitations and OBC quotas as the matter was pending in the courts. From 1931 till 2022, Mumbai has been lorded over by 76 Mayors, men and women, hailing from various regions, backgrounds, castes and communities. They included Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Parsis, Sikhs, even a Jew, etc., truly reflecting the cosmopolitan personality of the coastal city and India’s financial powerhouse. In 1931-1932, the Mayor was a Parsi, J. B. Boman Behram, and others from his community followed like Khurshed Framji Nariman (after whom Nariman Point is named), E. A. Bandukwala, Minoo Masani, B. N. Karanjia and other bigwigs. There were Muslims like Hoosenally Rahimtoola, Sultan M. Chinoy, the legendary Yusuf Meherally, Dr. A. U. Memon and others. The Christian community got a fair share of Mayors with Joseph A. D’Souza – who was Member of Constituent Assembly representing Bombay Province for writing-approving the Constitution of India, M. U. Mascarenhas, P. A. Dias, Simon C. Fernandes, J. Leon D’Souza, et al. A Jew Elijah Moses (1937-1938) and a Sikh M. H. Bedi (1983-1984), served as Mayors, but post-1985, for the past 40 years, nobody from any minority community occupied the august post. During the silver jubilee year of the post, Sulochana M. Modi became the first woman Mayor of Mumbai (1956), and later with tweaks in the rules, many women ruled in this post – Nirmala Samant-Prabhavalkar (1994-1995), Vishakha Raut (997-1998), Dr. Shubha Raul (March 2007-Nov. 2009), Shraddha Jadhav (Dec. 2009-March 2012), Snehal Ambedkar (Sep. 2014-March 2017). The last incumbent (before the Administrator) was a government nurse, Kishori Pednekar (Nov. 2019-March 2022) - who earned the sobriquet of ‘Florence Nightingale’ of Mumbai - as she flitted around in her full white uniform at the height of the Covid-19 Pandemic, earning the admiration of the citizens. Mumbai Mayor – high-profile post The Mumbai Mayor’s post is considered a crucial step in the political ladder and many went on to become MLAs, MPs, state-central ministers, a Lok Sabha Speaker, Chief Ministers and union ministers. The formidable S. K. Patil was Mayor (1949-1952) and later served in the union cabinets of PMs Jawaharlal Nehru, Lah Bahadur Shastri and Indira Gandhi; Dahyabhai V. Patel (1954-1955) was the son of India’s first Home Minister Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel; Manohar Joshi (1976-1977) became the CM of Maharashtra, later union minister and Speaker of Lok Sabha; Chhagan Bhujbal (1985-1986 – 1990-1991) became a Deputy CM.

Electoral Roll: Why Updating Stops Once Nominations Close

Part 4: The process of updating the electoral roll is continuous, but once the last date for filing nomination papers passes, the list is frozen until the results are declared.

The process of updating the electoral roll is continuous. It is not directly linked to any single election.


However, once the Election Commission of India announces the programme for a Lok Sabha or State Assembly election, the last date for filing nomination papers is fixed. The electoral roll as it stands on that date becomes final for the upcoming election.


This means that only voters whose names are included in the roll on that day are eligible to cast their vote. After the nomination deadline, no further changes can be made to the electoral roll until counting is completed and results are declared.


The Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court explained this principle in detail in the landmark case of Lakshmi Charan Sen vs. A.K.M. Hassan Uzman. The Court made it clear that while the roll is updated continuously, it remains frozen for the duration of the election process.


A related case was later brought before the Karnataka High Court and subsequently the Supreme Court, challenging changes made to the electoral roll after the nomination deadline. The judgements in this matter are also significant and must be understood.


Narendra Kheni v. Manikrao Patil

An election petition was filed in the Karnataka High Court challenging the elections to the Bidar Local Body Constituency for the Karnataka Legislative Council. These elections were held in May 1974.


The petitioners argued that some names had been added to the electoral roll after 3 pm on the last day for filing nominations. Under Section 23(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, no changes can be made to the electoral roll after the deadline for filing nominations until the election process is completed. This includes the addition of new names. In effect, the roll as it stands on the final day for nominations is treated as the definitive list of voters for that election.


In this case, the petitioners maintained that names were added to the roll after the cut-off time. Having reviewed the arguments and evidence presented by both sides, the Karnataka High Court ruled that the elections in the Bidar Local Body Constituency must be cancelled. The court found that including names in the roll after the deadline violated Section 23(3) of the Act.


Since these additions could potentially affect the election results, the court declared the process invalid and cancelled the elections. The Supreme Court later upheld the High Court’s decision.


The Central Election Commission has the authority to prepare the electoral roll for all constituencies. Guidelines on how and when these rolls should be updated are set out in Section 21 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950. The rolls must be revised before every Lok Sabha and Assembly election, as well as before by-elections. Once the deadline for filing nomination papers passes, no further changes can be made. The roll as it stands on that date is treated as final for that particular election. Additionally, Section 21(3) permits the Election Commission to conduct a special verification campaign for any constituency. The Commission also has the power to decide the procedure for such exercises. Using this provision, the Election Commission of India recently conducted a special verification campaign (SIR) in Bihar.


If the place of ordinary residence of a voter changes after his name is registered in the electoral roll, the Commission has the power to remove his name from the electoral roll of the relevant constituency under Section 22 of the same Act. If a person has passed away, the Commission has the power to remove their name from the electoral roll. However, before removing a person's name from the electoral roll, their side should be heard. This section also explains that no action should be taken unilaterally. That is, in any situation other than death, it is mandatory for the concerned officer to hear the person before removing his name from the electoral roll.


The provision for inclusion of name in the electoral roll is in Section 23 of the Representation of the People Act. If any voter wants to appeal in this regard, he or she can approach the District Collector or Additional District Collector. An appeal can also be made to the Chief Election Commissioner of the state against the decision of the District Collector. Provisions in this regard have been made in Section 24.


The discussion continues in Part 5.


(The writer is an author and a digital journalism teacher. Views personal.)

Comments

bottom of page