On 13 April 2026, the Supreme Court directed the high‑powered supervisory panel headed by Justice (retired) Sudhanshu Dhulia to decide the exact manner of applying a co‑option of women candidates amounting to 10% of the seats reserved under the 30% women reservation rule.
मुख्य विकास
- The bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi heard a writ petition highlighting possible misuse of the co‑option provision.
- Three options were tabled by the petitioner: (i) co‑option among the highest‑vote‑receiving women candidates who lost, (ii) delegation of the decision to State Bar Councils or the Bar Council of India (BCI), and (iii) entrusting the process to the State Election Committee.
- The Court observed that each option has merits and demerits and therefore tasked the Justice Dhulia committee to consult all stakeholders before finalising the method.
- The Court clarified that co‑option is a temporary measure for the current election year, not a permanent substitute for genuine electoral competition.
- Both the petitioner's counsel and an intervenor (a male candidate with the highest votes in Telangana) warned that a blanket co‑option rule could undermine the spirit of the reservation policy.
महत्वपूर्ण तथ्य
- The Advocates Act mandates election of Bar Council members through single transferable vote (STV).