( 1 ) IN this PIL petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, four Councillors of Surat, Vadodara, Rajkot and Bhavnagar Municipal Corporations have prayed for a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ to direct the Gujarat State Election Commissioner, the Municipal Corporations of the cities of Surat, Vadodara, Rajkot and Bhavnagar and the State of Gujarat to take all steps necessary for the purpose of holding elections for constituting the Municipal Corporations for the respective cities before the expiry of duration of the term of the present elected bodies of those Corporations constituted pursuant to the elections held in October, 2000.

( 2 ) IT is the case of the petitioners in this petition filed on 16th September 2005 that since the Municipal Corporations for the cities of Surat, Vadodara, Rajkot and Bhavnagar were constituted in October 2000 and the term of the elected bodies is due to expire on 16th, 16th, 15th and 20th October 2005 respectively, under the mandate of Clause (3) of Article 243u of the Constitution, the Election Commission is required to hold elections before the aforesaid dates; that the Constitution does not contemplate any hiatus between the expiry of the term of the existing body and the completion of elections for constituting the newly elected body. It is contended by the petitioners that the State Election Commission has violated the constitutional mandate contained in Article 243u (3) by not taking steps to hold elections before the aforementioned dates.

( 3 ) WHEN this petition came up for preliminary hearing on Monday, 19th September 2005, Rule was made returnable on 20th September, 2005. Affidavit in reply has been filed by Mr PC Barot, Deputy Election Commissioner in the State Election Commission ( the Election Commission or the Commission ) pointing out the reasons for inability of the Commission to hold elections to the Municipal Corporations of Bhavnagar, Jamnagar, Surat, Rajkot and Vadodara within the time limits stipulated in Clause (3) of Article 243u of the Constitution. It has been mainly submitted on behalf of the Commission that - (i) in view of the provisions of Section 5 (3) (a) of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as the BPMC Act ), upon availability of the 2001 census figures, the State Government was required to issue necessary notifications in the Official Gazette determining the number of wards into which the cities shall be divided, the number of councillors to be elected to the Corporations and the number of seats to be reserved in favour of the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and women and that thereafter the Election Commission was to carry out determination of the boundaries of the wards and the allocation of seats reserved in favour of the aforesaid classes amongst the wards in the prescribed manner. After getting the 2001 census figures on 16. 4. 2004, the Commission went on reminding the State Government since April 2004 to issue the necessary notifications under the aforesaid provisions having regard to the 2001 census figures. (ii) It was only when the State Government issued the notifications for this purpose on 8th June 2005 determining the number of wards, the number of constituencies and the number of seats reserved for the reserved categories that the Commission could undertake the exercise of determination of the boundaries of the wards and the allocation of seats reserved in favour of the reserved categories and issued the draft notifications to that effect on 18th July 2005 inviting objections and after considering those objections and after holding consultations with the political parties recognized under the Representation of People Act, 1951, the Commission issued the notifications dated 31st August 2005 determining the boundaries of the wards and the allocation of seats in favour of the reserved categories. (iii) On account of the census figures of 2001, the number of wards, the n