C/SCA/4655/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/04/2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4655 of 2026 ========================================================== ISHWARBHAI NARSENGBHAI PARMAR Versus THE STATE ELECTION COMMISSION & ORS. ========================================================== Appearance: MR. AMRUT H BHATIYA(7042) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MR.KISHORE PRAJAPATI(6305) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 AISHVARYA(8018) for the Respondent(s) No. 1 MS SHRUTI DHRUVE, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J. L. ODEDRA Date : 01/04/2026 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA) 1. In this writ petition, the petitioner calls in question the decision of the authorities allotting the reservation to of the election of the members of the District Panchayat, Vav- Tharad. 2. It is not in dispute that as required under Rule 5 of the Gujarat Taluka and District Panchayats (Delimitation of Electoral Divisions) Rules, 2010, the State Election Commission before -nalizing the proposed delimitation of Electoral Divisions of Taluka and District Panchayats and allocation of seats reserved for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Backward Classes and Women did invite suggestions from the general public and also consulted the political parties recognized under the Representation of People Act. 3. Learned counsel for the State Election Commission C/SCA/4655/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/04/2026 points out that the petitioner however did not choose to give any suggestions when the draft noti-cation was published on 25.2.2026 and hence, he would be precluded from challenging the -nal noti-cation issued on 9.3.2026. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submitted that though in earlier draft noti-cations 25.2.2026, in which for the village of Vav and Tadav to which the petitioner has been concerned, the seat had been reserved for Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Caste woman respectively. He submitted that since the earlier noti-cation provided for reservation for SC and SC woman, he did not raise any queries. 5. This argument would, therefore, indicate that the petitioner herein did not have any qualms regarding the draft noti-cation dated 25.2.2026 and was satis-ed about the reservation being allocated to the Scheduled Caste woman. 6. In our view, since the petitioner did not raise any objection or submitted any suggestions, he is precluded from challenging the -nal noti-cation issued thereafter, whereby reservation allotted to the Scheduled Caste woman has been con-rmed. We therefore, DISMISS the writ petition. Sd/- (N.S.SANJAY GOWDA,J) Sd/-- (J. L. ODEDRA, J) OMKAR Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judges. Digitally signed by: OMKAR CHHAGANLAL MAHAWAR(HC00201), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 02/04/2026 16:47:21