Latest
Thursday, October 22, 2026
Rajasthan High Court
Constitutional Law

SC Woman in 2020, OBC Woman in 2026: Rajasthan High Court Upholds Sarpanch Reservation Rotation

Published: · NyayVidhan

The Rajasthan High Court upheld the reservation of the office of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Manchi for an OBC woman in the 2026 Panchayati Raj elections, although the same office had been reserved for an SC woman in 2020 (paras 1-2, 21). Reservation for women is horizontal and runs across the vertical SC, ST and Backward Class categories, so an earlier reservation for women does not by itself bar a later one (paras 14, 19). The writ petition was dismissed (para 22).

SC Woman in 2020, OBC Woman in 2026: Rajasthan High Court Upholds Sarpanch Reservation Rotation

Judgment Intelligence

Petition Dismissed
Satish Kumar Sharma & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.
2026:RJ-JP:40481
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19981/2026
Court
Rajasthan High Court
Date of Decision
1 October 2026
Bench
Justice Anand Sharma
Relevant Acts & Sections
Constitution of India — Article 243D; Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 — Sections 15, 16; Rajasthan Panchayati Raj (Election) Rules, 1994 — Rules 7, 9
Final Outcome

Writ petition dismissed: the order of 24.09.2026 reserving the office of Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Manchi, for OBC (Woman) accords with the constitutional and statutory scheme and the rotation prescribed by law; pending applications disposed of (paras 21-23).

Source Rajasthan High Court, hcraj.nic.in — judgment dated 01.10.2026

Key holdings

  1. Reservation for women is horizontal: an SC-woman seat remains an SC seat earmarked for a woman (para 14).
  2. Rotation spreads reservation across elections; the previous allocation and the stage of the cycle are relevant (para 17).
  3. A Ward or Panchayat reserved for women earlier is not, for that reason alone, barred from such reservation later (para 19).
  4. The Bombay High Court’s Pelmahale decision rests on Maharashtra’s rules and cannot be applied mechanically in Rajasthan (para 20).

Judgment digest by NyayVidhan: a summary of the court's judgment, not its text. The judgment itself is the authoritative version.

Brief Facts

By an order dated 24.09.2026 under the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj (Election) Rules, 1994, the Sub-Divisional Officer, Bansur, reserved the office of Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Manchi, for OBC (Woman) (para 1). Residents of the village challenged it: the office had been reserved for SC (Woman) in 2020, so reserving it for a woman again in 2026 was said to breach the rotation required by Article 243D, Sections 15 and 16 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 and Rules 7 and 9 (paras 2, 5-6). They also complained that the lottery was held without disclosing the roster or pool, and sought a fresh draw (paras 3-4, 7). The State replied that reservation for women is horizontal (paras 8-10).

Court's Findings

The Court read the Act and Rules of 1994 against Article 243D, which reserves seats for SCs and STs in proportion to population, reserves seats for women, provides for rotation and lets the State reserve offices of Chairpersons and provide for Backward Classes (para 13). Reservation for SCs, STs and Backward Classes is vertical; reservation for women is horizontal and operates across those categories, so an SC-woman seat remains an SC seat earmarked for a woman (para 14). Section 15 raises the women's share to one-half, above the constitutional minimum (para 15). Rule 7 first fixes the category-wise reservation and then fits the women's component within it and within the overall quota (para 16). Rotation spreads reservation over successive elections and prevents its permanent attachment to particular constituencies; the previous allocation and the stage reached in the cycle are relevant (para 17). For women, it works within each category (para 18). The test is whether the category-wise reservation, the women's component and the prescribed rotation were correctly applied; an earlier reservation for women does not by itself make a later one impermissible (para 19). The Bombay High Court's decision in Pelmahale turned on Maharashtra's rules (para 20).

Legal Principle

Under Article 243D and the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act and Rules of 1994, reservation for women is horizontal and operates within the SC, ST and Backward Class categories. An office reserved for women of one category in one election may be reserved for women of another category in the next if the prescribed rotation is followed (paras 14, 18-19, 21).

Precedents Relied Upon

  1. Narendra Subhash Pelmahale v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. Writ Petition No. 12576/2025, decided 14.07.2026 (Bombay High Court)
    Distinguished Discussed at ¶ 7, 20

    Relied on by the petitioners; it was rendered under Section 30(4)(c) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act and Rule 2A(4) of the Sarpanch election rules, lays down no general proposition and cannot be applied mechanically in Rajasthan.

Statutory Provisions

NyayVidhan
Court Judgments · 3 min read
Decided: October 1, 2026 Justice Anand Sharma
PDF
 Join our WhatsApp Group
✕

Try: POCSO, IBC, Electoral Bond, Article 370, NDPS Act, Bail Conditions, SC Contempt