Under the multimember district system, a single district elects three or four corporators instead of one. A municipal corporation is made up of several such districts.

The State Electoral Commission introduced the system to align representation with population size in large urban centres. Each voter in a district must cast multiple votes corresponding to each panel seat. Electoral authorities say the format aims to provide broader representation in densely populated areas, reduce the number of districts while maintaining proportional representation and encourage cooperation between corporations of different parties for the coordinated development of districts.

However, this predicted diversity was observed in only one district, Navi District 22. Bombay Municipal corporation where the four elected members belonged to different political parties namely BJP Shiv Sena, UBT Sena and MNS. In total, 820 corporations were elected from 208 panels in the eight municipal corporations that followed the panel system.

Experts attribute the dominance of same-party panels to multiple factors ranging from the system favoring the largest, ruling parties to voter behavior shaped by past experiences and familiarity with party symbols.

According to data on winning candidates in the Thane Municipal Corporation, 21 of the 33 wards elected panels from the same party. In the Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation, 19 of the 28 wards followed the same pattern. In Mira Bhayander Municipal Corporation, 18 of the 24 wards elected same-party panels, while in Vasai Virar Municipal Corporation, 25 of the 29 wards voted similarly.

In the Kalyan Dombivli Municipal Corporation, 12 of the 31 panels were made up of members of the same political party. In Bhiwandi Nizampur Municipal Corporation, 19 out of 23 panels did so, while Panvel and Ulhasnagar each recorded 8 out of 20 and 10 out of 20 panels respectively with members from a single party.

In total, in the eight municipal corporations, 132 of the 208 panels or 63.46 per cent elected candidates from the same party.

Political analyst Surendra Jondhale said voter familiarity plays an important role. “In most cases, voters end up voting for all the candidates of a major party, especially the ruling party, as in several cases they hardly know the candidates of other smaller parties and independents from their Prabhag constituency,” he said.

Vivek Ghotale of the Unique Foundation, which has conducted a study on the multiple district system, said smaller parties and independents are at a disadvantage. “According to my research, smaller parties and independent candidates suffer in such a system as the prabhag is much larger, four times the capacity of a corporation and these people cannot reach all the voters in their prabhags nor do they have the resources to do so,” he said.

“Therefore, if we see national parties, especially the ruling parties will benefit as they have greater resources and also their symbols are known to the people,” Ghotale added.

Dr Sanjay Patil, an academic and researcher in urban politics, said voters’ experience also influences the results. “For example, Thane Municipal Corporation TMC also had a panel system in 2017 and people may have felt that wards that had the same party panel were more effective,” he said.

He added: “Also, since there are four candidates to vote for, people sometimes don’t know all the candidates. They may like one candidate and vote for the others on their party panel. What this does is that even if there is a strong candidate because of him, other weaker candidates may also be voted for.”

Another expert who is a government employee and is pursuing a doctorate on the topic said the system dilutes the individual impact of voters. “Since larger areas are involved in prabhags, it becomes difficult for a candidate from the minority community or a particular caste to get voted in. Since a member’s wards are smaller, the chances of a particular community being present in the area could mean that they can influence who is selected. This advantage is neutralized in a larger area where the dominant population ensures that their candidates are selected,” the expert said.

Jondhale added, “Political parties in the past and present have created multi-member constituencies in such a way that they become more useful and complementary to the ruling party. Unlike the single constituency corporator, multi-member panel is more conducive to them.”