The main legal point established in the judgment is that there is no legal requirement for the election of Ward Member to precede the election of 'Pramukh/Up-Pramukh/Pradhan'. The court also emphasized that bye-elections can be conducted from existing members and that the court should not pass interim orders in election matters after they are notified.

1. - By way of these writ petitions a challenge has been made to the notification issued by the State Election Commission for holding elections for the posts of "Pramukh/Up Pramukh/Pradhan" for various Panchayati Raj Institutions.

2. The facts which are common in all the writ petitions are that posts of "Pramukh/Up Pramukh/Pradhan" and also the Ward Member fell vacant as holders of the post were elected as a Member of Legislative Assembly. In some cases, posts of Ward Member fell vacant on account of death of the member. As a consequence of falling posts of "Pramukh/Up-Pramukh/ Pradhan" vacant, State Election Commission issued notification to hold elections for those posts, which have been questioned by way of these writ petitions mainly on the ground that without holding the election of Ward Member at the first instance, the State Election Commission should not have issued notification to hold elections of the posts of Pramukh/Up-Pramukh/Pradhan (hereinafter referred to as 3 posts').

3. Learned counsel appearing in these cases raised common issue for determination by this Court. Referring to the constitutional provision pertaining to Panchayat as well as provision of the Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to Act, 1994) and Rajasthan Panchayati Raj (Election) Rules, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules of 1994'), it,is contended that object behind making amendment in the constitution is to bring specific provision for Panchayati Raj Institutions and to see that Panchayati Raj Institutions work as per the mandate of Constitution. For that purpose Article 243(C) of the Constitution of India provides composition of Panchayats. Referring to the aforesaid provision, it is urged that when composition of Panchayats provides a proper representation on the basis of territorial constituencies then to maintain the aforesaid mandate, the State Election Commission should have conducted elections of vacant seats of respective wards first so as to complete the composition of Panchayats for further elections on the posts of "Pramukh/Up-Pramukh/Pradhan".

4. Referring to the facts of the case, it is stated that a few persons holding the post of Pramukh/Up-Pramukh/Pradhan were recently elected as members of legislative assembly, thus not only that aforesaid posts fell vacant but the posts of Ward Member also fell vacant. To clarify the position, it is submitted that by way of direct election; ward members are elected and after holding the direct election of ward members, posts of Pramukh/Up-Pramukh/Pradhan are filled up by way of indirect election from and amongst elected ward members. In the absence of an election of a ward member of a particular ward, the voters coming from the aforesaid ward will have no representation and chance to contest election of the post of Pramukh/Up-Pramukh/Pradhan, thus, the mandate of Constitution as envisaged and provided under Article 243(C) of the Constitution of India would be violated.

5. A reference of the Act of 1994 and the Rules made therein is also made. Section 9 of the Act of 1994 provides establishment of Panchayat whereas Sections 10 and 11 provide estabishment of Panchayat Samiti and Jila Parishad. Sections 12, 13 and 14 provide composition of 3 Panchayati Raj Institutions whereas Section 17 provides duration of an election of Panchati Raj Institutions. Sections 28 and 29 provides for election of Pradhan/Up-Pradhan and Pramukh/Up-Pramukh. Referring to the aforesaid provisions, learned counsels for petitioners submitted that after conducting election of Ward Members as required and after having composition of Panchayati Raj Institutions, election for " the post of Pramukh/Up- Pramukh/Pradhan/Up-Pradhan can be held as per the provisions of Sections 28 and 29 of the Act of 1994. According to them, in absence of election of Ward Member, composition of Panchayati Raj Instituions would not be complete, thus to hold election of 3 posts indicated above is improper. On the strength of