Gujarat High CourtElection LawAdministrative and Public Law

General category female candidates are legally entitled to contest for both reserved female seats and unreserved general seats.

ANKURKUMAR AJITKUMAR TRIVEDI (MARFATIYA)v.THE STATE ELECTION COMMISSION

General category female candidates are legally entitled to contest for both reserved female seats and unreserved general seats.. ANKURKUMAR AJITKUMAR TRIVEDI (MARFATIYA) vs THE STATE ELECTION COMMISSION. Gujarat High Court. LawLens
The LawLens card for this judgmentXLinkedInWhatsApp

In brief

The question

1. Whether a candidate classified as a "General Woman Candidate" is restricted to contesting only the seat reserved for women, or if she is also entitled to compete for an unreserved General seat

The court held

The High Court dismissed the petition

It also directed

It held that a General (woman) candidate is entitled by law to contest both the seat reserved for women and the unreserved General seat. Since the presence of other validly nominated candidates in the Ward (who are eligible for the unreserved seat) creates a contest, the petitioner cannot be declared elected unopposed

The Court upheld the decision of the Returning Officer to proceed with the scheduled election

01Facts

The petitioner filed a nomination for seat No. 4 (allocated for the ‘General’ category) in Ward No. 8 of Siddhpur Nagarpalika

¶ 1-2

Out of four seats in the ward (SEBC Woman, General Woman, SEBC, and General), candidates for the two SEBC-related seats were declared elected unopposed

¶ 4-6

For the remaining two seats, three ladies filed nominations for the General (woman) seat, while only the petitioner filed for the General seat

¶ 7-8

The petitioner sought a declaration that he should be elected unopposed, arguing that since he was the sole candidate for the "General" seat and the other three candidates were specifically for "General (woman)," there was no contest for his seat

¶ 9

02Issues

i.1. Whether a candidate classified as a "General Woman Candidate" is restricted to contesting only the seat reserved for women, or if she is also entitled to compete for an unreserved General seat

¶ 14

ii.2. Whether the petitioner, as the sole male candidate in the general category, is entitled to be declared elected unopposed despite the presence of validly nominated female candidates in the same ward

¶ 20-21

03Law Applied

Gujarat Municipalities (Conduct of Election) Rules, 1994: Rule 7(8) stipulates that while specific documentation (caste certificates) is required for reserved category claims (SC/ST/SEBC), no such restrictive rule exists for general category women

¶ 11-12

Rule 9(a) defines a "General woman candidate" as one entitled to be elected against both a seat reserved for a general woman and an unreserved seat

¶ 13-14

Rule 9(h) defines a "General male candidate" as one entitled to be elected against an unreserved seat but none other

¶ 13

04Reasoning

The Court rejected the petitioner’s argument, holding that the classification under Rule 9(a) explicitly allows General (woman) candidates to compete for both the reserved female seat and the unreserved General seat

¶ 14

The court noted that there is no legal rule stating that by opting for a reserved category, a candidate forfeits the right to contest an unreserved seat

¶ 16-17

Therefore, since the three female candidates are legally eligible to contest against the petitioner for the unreserved seat, a competitive election is necessary

¶ 18-19

If any of the female candidates secure more votes than the petitioner, they could be declared elected to the General seat

¶ 20

Consequently, the Returning Officer’s decision to deny the "unopposed" status was found to be legally sound

¶ 21

05Holding

The High Court dismissed the petition

¶ 21

It held that a General (woman) candidate is entitled by law to contest both the seat reserved for women and the unreserved General seat. Since the presence of other validly nominated candidates in the Ward (who are eligible for the unreserved seat) creates a contest, the petitioner cannot be declared elected unopposed

¶ 19-20

The Court upheld the decision of the Returning Officer to proceed with the scheduled election

¶ 21
Gujarat High Court

Original Court PDF

ANKURKUMAR AJITKUMAR TRIVEDI (MARFATIYA)vsTHE STATE ELECTION COMMISSION

Gujarat High Court · April 21, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment