( 1 ) PETITIONER in this petition challenges the notification notifying the election programme for Bhuj Municipality-respondent No. 1 herein pursuant to the order passed by the D. B. of this Court, dated 11/10/1990 and he further challenges the notification insofar as it relates to reservation of seats for Scheduled Caste in Ward Nos. 6 and 9.

( 2 ) THIS litigation has a chequered history. The election of Councillors of bhuj Municipality was due in May, 1990. The notification of election programme and reservation of seats for women and Scheduled Caste candidates was issued. It was subject-matter of challenge in Special C. A. No. 4171 of 1990 wherein the failure to rotate the reserved seats of women in three wards was the main and perhaps the only ground of challenge. The learned single Judge of this Court stayed the election which gave rise to the two Letters Patent Appeals. Finally, by judgment and order, dated 11-10-1990 which was the order passed by consent and concurrence of all parties appearing before the Division Bench, the Court upheld the challenge to the reservation of seats for women in Ward Nos. 1, 8 and 12 and further directed that seats for women shall be rotated and reserved for Ward Nos. 6, 9 and 13. The Division Bench also fixed the entire election programme with the consent and concurrence of all the parties appearing before the Court. it is required to be noted that Bhuj Municipality-respondent No. 1 herein and the State of Gujarat-respondent No. 2 herein were parties to the proceedings before the Division Bench. Both these respondents, however, did not point out to the Division Bench of this Court that there was failure to rotate the reserved seats for Scheduled Caste from Ward Nos. 6 and 9 to Ward Nos. 5 and 10. This failure is one of the grounds of challenge to subsequent notification in this petition.

( 3 ) IT appears that in exercise of powers conferred by Secs. 6 (3) and (2) read with sub-sec. (1a) of Sec. 7 of the Gujarat Municipalities Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as the "said Act") the State of Gujarat-the respondent No. 2 herein having regard to the population of Bhuj Municipality determined the total number of Councillors required to be elected as 35 and also determined number of seats required to be reserved for women as three and number of seats required to be reserved for Scheduled Caste as two. As regards reservation of three seats of women and two seats for Scheduled caste, it was stipulated in the said notification that the reservation shall rotate as indicated in columns 4 (a) and 4 (b) of the schedule to the said notification. The said notification refers to reservation of seats for women vide column 4 (a) and vide column 4 (b) refers to reservation of seats for Scheduled Caste candidates. In the said Schedule against Ward Nos. 6 and 9 in column 4 (b) it is stated that one seat shall rotate in Ward Nos. 6 and 9 beginning with ward No. 6 and one seat shall rotate in Ward Nos. 9 and 10 beginning with Ward No. 9. It appears that by the said notification, Government exercised powers under Sec. 6 (3) (a) and (b) and reserved seats for women as well as for S. C. candidates and also provided as to how such reservation shall rotate. It may be mentioned that the validity of said notification is not under challenge. It is also not in dispute that pursuant to this notification, wards were constituted and seats were determined and reserved for the election of Councillors of Bhuj Municipality that took place in the year 1988. It is admitted position that there were two seats reserved for S. C. candidates in the election held in 1985 and one seat was reserved from Ward No. 6 and another seat was reserved from Ward No. 9. If the said notification is to operate in the election which was due in the year 1990 the reserved seats for S. C. candidates shall rotate to Ward Nos. 5 and 10.

( 4 ) IT appears that since the election of the respondent No. 1-Municipality was due, the Collector-respondent