FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 8653 OF 2011 " Pandit Bhimrao Jogdand Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others." Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's Orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. 1 Mr. N.B. Khandare, Advocate holding for Mr. Manish P. Tripathi, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. P.P. More, AGP for respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Mr. S.T. Shelke, Advocate for respondent No.3. CORAM :- B.R. GAVAI & M.T. JOSHI, JJ. DATE :- 15th NOVEMBER, 2011. PER COURT :- 1] By way of present petition, the petitioners are challenging the notification dated 4th October, 2011, issued by the respondent NO.3 Election Commission, and praying for a direction to the Department to provide reservation considering the 2012 election, as the first election. 2] Shri Khandare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that after the decision of the State Government to increase womens' reservation to 50% from 33%, various amendments have been made to local laws like the Bombay Village Panchayat Act, the Maharashtra Municipalities Act, the Zilla Parishad Act. Shri Khandare submits that in so far as the Gram panchayats are concerned, the Election Commission FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 8653 OF 2011 " Pandit Bhimrao Jogdand Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others." Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's Orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. 2 has issued a direction to treat the elections of 2011 as first election since it is being held for the first time after the amendment to increase reservation to 50% from 33% to the women, is incorporated. It is further submitted that in so far as Zilla Parishads are concerned, it is directed that while considering the reservations to be provided for this year, the reservations which were made earlier, should also be taken into consideration. He, therefore, submits that the reservations which will be made to the Zilla Parishads, will not be in accordance the constitutional mandate and the 1996 rules, which provides for reservation to be made by rotation. 3] In so far as the Zilla Parishads are concerned, the constituencies are multi member constituencies and are not single member constituencies. Naturally, therefore, while working out the reservation for multi member constituencies are concerned, the parameters would be totally different as against the parameters which will have to be applied to a single member constituency. Indisputably, in so far as Panchayat Samitis are concerned, the constituencies are single member constituencies. We, therefore, find that the impugned notification which provides the reservation for 2010 elections, to be provided by rotation after considering the reservation made in 2002 and 2007 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 8653 OF 2011 " Pandit Bhimrao Jogdand Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others." Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's Orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. 3 elections, is rather upholding the mandate of rotation than frustrating it. However, since the reservation is now increased to 50% from 33%, it would be inevitable that the reservation in some constituencies may be repeated. Not only this, but the Division Bench of this court in W.P. No. 5386 of 2006, while considering Rule 4 of the Maharashtra Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis (Manner of rotation of reservation of seats) Rules, 1996 itself has held that , “It is inevitable that on account of increase in the population and increase in the number of electoral divisions the reservation is likely to be repeated in respect of some electoral divisions. However, the respondents ought to exercise proper care to see that as far as possible the reservation is not repeated.” 4] In that view of the matter, we do not find that any case is made out for interference. Needless to state that the authorities shall take due care to ensure that the reservation is not repeated as far as practicable and possible. Writ petition is dismissed. [M.T. JOSHI,J.] [B.R. GAVAI, J.] grt/-