Ganshyam Choudhary vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 6 December, 2025

Author: Pushpendra Singh Bhati

Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati

[2025:RJ-JD:52940-DB]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11054/2023

Ganshyam Choudhary S/o Rupa Ram, Aged About 37 Years,
Village Hemliyawas Kalan, Panchayat Samiti Marwar Junction,
District Pali (Aadhar No. 5676 7969 9695).
                                                                       ----Petitioner
                                       Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of
         Local Self, Jaipur (Rajasthan).
2.       Director,      Department         Of     Local-Self,       Government    Of
         Rajasthan, Jaipur (Rajasthan).
3.       State Election Commissioner, Jaipur, Rajasthan, Through
         Chief Election Officer.
4.       District Election Officer, Pali.
5.       Chief Executive Officer, Municipal Board Marwar Junction,
         District Pali.
                                                                    ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)            :     Mr. Moti Singh
For Respondent(s)            :     Mr. Rajesh Panwar, Sr. Av. & AAG
                                   assisted by Mr. Ayush Gehlot
                                   Mr. Vikas Balia, Sr. Adv. assisted by
                                   Mr. Sachin Saraswat



     HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEET PUROHIT

Order

06/12/2025

1. Learned Senior Advocate and Additional Advocate General

informs the Court in the matter of Sheela Kumari Vs. Jagdish

Shekhawat & Ors. in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.7718/2025 and

other connected matters, decided on 14.11.2025, it has been

directed by this Court that the elections shall be held on or before

(Uploaded on 15/12/2025 at 05:00:56 PM)

[2025:RJ-JD:52940-DB] (2 of 5) [CW-11054/2023]

15.04.2026. The relevant paragraphs of the said judgment reads

as under:-

"219. While considering the rival submissions made at Bar, it is clear that even while taking into account the Constitutional mandate of holding the election before the expiry of term of local bodies, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in various cases while taking note of exceptional circumstances, has permitted the postponement of the elections. Pendency of the Delimitation process is also considered as one such exceptional circumstance and while considering the same, the Hon'ble Apex Court has issued direction to first complete the process of Delimitation and then to hold the elections. We are in agreement with the contention of the learned Advocate General that the facts of the present case also akin to the judgments as relied upon on behalf of the State and the reason for issuing the notification for appointment of Administrator / postponement of election in the peculiar facts and circumstances of present case cannot be said to be unjustified or arbitrary.

220. The respondent-State, while justifying its action of deferment of elections to various Panchayati Raj Institutions and Urban Local Bodies, has primarily contended that the State has undertaken a massive and complex exercise for the complete reorganisation and restructuring of these local self-governing bodies across the entire State. It is submitted that this exercise was necessitated by a number of factors, including the haphazard creation and elevation of municipalities by the previous government without ensuring their financial viability, and the administrative and financial strain caused by staggered election cycles, a situation exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. The State has highlighted its policy decision, reflected in the budget presented on 10.07.2024, to constitute a High-Level Committee to recommend the restructuring and delimitation of these bodies and to examine the feasibility of a 'One State, One Election' model to save public resources.

(Uploaded on 15/12/2025 at 05:00:56 PM)

[2025:RJ-JD:52940-DB] (3 of 5) [CW-11054/2023]

221. The record indicates that the State Government has taken concrete steps to actualize this policy. A series of meetings of the Cabinet Sub-Committees and a High-Level Expert Committee were held to review the creation of new districts, divisions and the overall structure of rural and urban local bodies. Pursuant to these recommendations, the State has not only abolished certain newly created districts but has also issued detailed guidelines and timelines for the reconstitution and delimitation of Village Panchayats, Panchayat Samitis, Zila Parishads and Municipalities. The State's argument is that this comprehensive overhaul will result in large-scale alteration of territorial jurisdictions, dissolution of some existing bodies, creation of new ones, and changes in the very character of these institutions from rural to urban and vice-versa.

222. Consequently, the State contends that holding elections for the existing local bodies, whose form, nature, and territorial limits are subject to imminent and substantial change, would be a futile and wasteful exercise. It is argued that such elections would be for a very brief term and would squander significant public funds and administrative resources. Furthermore, any election would have to be preceded by a fresh delimitation of wards, revision of electoral rolls and determination of reservations for various categories, including for OBCs, for which an independent commission is also being constituted as per the mandate of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The State submits that this entire reorganisation is being conducted in the larger public interest to strengthen these institutions financially and functionally, and it is committed to holding the elections expeditiously as soon as this bona fide exercise is completed.

223. Having perused the detailed contentions and the plethora of documents submitted by the respondent-State, this Court finds merit in the justification provided for the inability to adhere to the statutory election schedule. The decision to undertake a complete reorganisation of local bodies is a significant policy matter falling within the

(Uploaded on 15/12/2025 at 05:00:56 PM)

[2025:RJ-JD:52940-DB] (4 of 5) [CW-11054/2023]

executive domain. The series of actions taken, from the formation of high-level committees to the issuance of statutory notifications and timelines for delimitation, demonstrates that the State is not merely seeking to postpone elections indefinitely but is actively engaged in a complex, large-scale administrative restructuring. The reasoning that it would be contrary to public interest to expend vast resources on elections for institutions that may cease to exist or be fundamentally altered in the near future is rational and persuasive. The underlying objective, particularly holding the elections simultaneously, represents a futuristic and economically prudent approach. Such a synchronized electoral cycle may result in substantial savings of public funds, minimization of administrative stasis caused by the recurrent imposition of the Model Code of Conduct, and the optimal deployment of state machinery.

Thus, this Court concludes that exercise of the State appears to be bona fide and aimed at achieving long-term systemic improvements in local self-governance, however, looking to the constitutional mandate, this Court deems it proper to issue appropriate directions to the State Government to hold the elections of the Local Self Institutions without any unnecessary delay and to conduct and conclude the same in a time bound manner. 224.7 In view of the adjudication made and conclusion drawn in Part-G of the judgment, D. B. Civil Writ Petition (PIL) No.4686/2025 [Sanyam Lodha Vs. State of Rajasthan] as well as D. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1285/2025 (Giriraj Singh Devanda vs. State of Rajasthan & ors.) praying for a direction for holding the elections of Municipality or Panchayati Raj Institutions, respectively, are disposed of with a direction to the State Government that after completing the delimitation exercise, elections of all the Local Self Bodies i.e. Panchayats as well as Municipality, shall immediately be conducted simultaneously and the entire exercise for such elections shall be completed on or before 15.04.2026."

(Uploaded on 15/12/2025 at 05:00:56 PM)

[2025:RJ-JD:52940-DB] (5 of 5) [CW-11054/2023]

2. Learned AAG submits that the respondents shall strictly

adhere to the aforesaid directions.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, at this stage, that the

directions of this Court in Sheela Kumari (supra) be strictly

complied with.

4. Accordingly, the instant writ petition is disposed of in the

same terms as laid down in Sheela Kumari (supra).

5. In case any issue remains, the petitioner shall be at liberty to

approach this Court afresh.

(SANJEET PUROHIT),J (DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J