( 1 ) WHAT is one of the basic features of the Indian Constitution is something which causes grin amongst some persons. Democracy is a basic feature of the Indian cons titution and that is dependent upon free, fair and timely ejections in the State. Democracy at the grassroot levels was sought to be provided with the Seventy- third and Seventy-Fourth Amendments of the Constitution in the year; 1992. The fear and grin of the elections to the various offices at the grassroot level have led numerous petitions being filed in this Court, at different points of time by different parties, solely with a view to thwart the holding of such elections. The present petition is the latest in this line. ( 2 ) WITH these aforesaid observations, we proceed to consider the contentions sought to be raised by the petitioners in this case. Before doing so, it will be necessary to bear in mind that the Seventy-Third and seventy-Fourth Amendments to the constitution required, elections to the panchayats and the Municipalities within a stipulated time-frame. In the beginning, it is in this State, where, on two occasions, Acts were passed by the legislature, which had the effect of postponing the elections. Now, when the elections are round the corner, when the earlier efforts to postpone having failed, and Rules have been framed, though belatedly, for the holding of the elections, the second round of litigation, which is now starting, is the challenge to the Rules. It is contended by the learned Counsel for the petitioners that important questions arise and this is the first time that such a challenge to the Rules, recently framed, has been made and, therefore, the Court should admit the petition and set it down for final hearing. The very fact that the challenge relates to elections at the grassroot, we have heard the counsel for the. petitioner at length and as we are unable to accept any of his contentions, it is not necessary to prolong the case any further by issuing a rule and hearing the petition after a few months. ( 3 ) THE first contention which was raised was that Section 9 (5) (a) of the Gujarat panchayats Act, 1993 is ultra vires. The submission of the learned Counsel was that under this Act, pursuant to the direction given by Part. ( 3 ) THE first contention which was raised was that Section 9 (5) (a) of the Gujarat panchayats Act, 1993 is ultra vires. The submission of the learned Counsel was that under this Act, pursuant to the direction given by Part. IX of the Constitution, there is reservation of seats not only for scheduled -Castes and Scheduled Tribes, but also for Socially and Educationally backward Classes (hereinafter referred to as "s. E. B. C" ). It is submitted that, whereas the number of seats which had to be reserved for SC and ST is dependent upon relative population of SC and ST in a village, in case of S. E. B. C. , however, the act provides that the number of seats would be one-tenth of the total number of seats in a village Panchayat. The learned counsel contends that the actual population of the villages may so vary that in some villages the number of S. E. B. C. may be less than 10%, whereas in the other, it may be far more. Therefore, it is contended, to provide for a uniform proportion of one- tenth of the seats in all the village panchayats being reserved for S. E. B. C. is arbitrary. ( 4 ) WE are unable to agree with this contention. It will be seen that reservation of seats in the Panchayats is referred to under Article 243-D of the Constitution. Sub-Article (1) provides for reservation of sc. s and ST. s to be in the same proportion as that of their population in the panchayat area. In other words, the number of seats to be reserved for SC and ST will be dependent upon the proportion of their population in the villages. On the other hand, Sub-Article (6) of Article 243-D states that the Legislature of a State is not prevented from making any reservation in any panchayat or offices of Chairpersons in favour of backward class of citizens. The parliament, while incorporating the seventy-Third and. On the other hand, Sub-Article (6) of Article 243-D states that the Legislature of a State is not prevented from making any reservation in any panchayat or offices of Chairpersons in favour of backward class of citizens. The parliament, while incorporating the seventy-Third and. Seventy-Fourth amendments in the Constitution, did not think it fit to place sub Article - (6) at par with Sub-article (1), whereas the principle of proportion to the population is a determining factor in deciding the number of seats to be reserved for SC and ST That principle is not compulsorily required to be followed when and State Legislature makes a provision for reservation tor S. E. B: C. If the contention of Mr, G. N. Desai is correct, then the S. E. B. G category would also haye been included in sub- article (1) of Article 243-D. The implication, therefore, which is very clear is that the Constitution has left it to the wisdom of the State Legislatures to decide as to what extent and; in what manner reservation may be provided for the backward class. ( 5 ) WE are unable to agree that by prescribing reservation, of one-tenth in every village-panchayal in favour of S. E. B, C. it can be called arbitrary. It is no doubt true that the proportion of the population of S. E. B. C. in various villages may vary. But that does not mean that a uniform rate of reservation is per se bad, as we sought to be made out before us. For example, there is reservation which is provided for admission to various government services and educational institutions, which is of a fixed rate. The determination of the percentage of reservation is not dependent or calculated on the strength of the SC, ST. s. vis-a-vis the total population. Therefore, a fixed percentage of reservation cannot per se be regarded as bad or Arbitrary. We, therefore, do not find any force this, contention. ( 6 ) OUR attention was drawn to Rule 7 of the Gujarat Villages Panchayats Etection. s. vis-a-vis the total population. Therefore, a fixed percentage of reservation cannot per se be regarded as bad or Arbitrary. We, therefore, do not find any force this, contention. ( 6 ) OUR attention was drawn to Rule 7 of the Gujarat Villages Panchayats Etection. of sarpanch (Manner, of Allotment of reserved Offices of Sarpanch by Rotation) rules, 1994, which provide for allotment of offices of Sarpaach reserved for S. E. B. C. This requires the names of the village panchayats to be arranced according to alphabetical order and serial number, such as "s. E. I" and "s. E. 2" and, so on being assigned where the population of S. E. B. C. is more than 5% of the total population. It was sought to be submitted that when the proportion of population has been resorted to for the purposes of determining the reservation for the post of Sarpanch, there is no reason why such a provision should not have been resorted to while determining the number of seats in the village panchayat to be reserved for S. E. B. C. candidates. In our opinion, there is no merit in this submission. Having determined by a fixed rate the extent of reservation for S. E. B. C. , a further provision has been made in the rules so as to ensure that some of the offices of Sarpanch are, at a point of time, held by the persons belonging to S. E. B. C. We do not see any force in the contention that the principle which is contained in the said Rule 7, should have guided the State legislature while making a provision for reservation of S. E. B. C. in the various panchayats. ( 7 ) IT was next submitted that the aforesaid Rule 7 is arbitrary, because it contemplates a list of villages having more than 5% population belonging to S. E. B. C. to be prepared on the basis of alphabetical order. It is not in dispute that once a list of S. E. B. C. villages are prepared and serial number assigned then the turn of each village or panchayat will come for being appointed as a Sarpanch at some point of time. It is not in dispute that once a list of S. E. B. C. villages are prepared and serial number assigned then the turn of each village or panchayat will come for being appointed as a Sarpanch at some point of time. Once the number of villages have been identified, which contain more than 5% of the population as belonging to S. E. B. C. , a list has to be prepared and there are a number of methods in which the seniority can be assigned. One may be on the basis of population, which is sought to be canvassed by the petitioner, but another may be on the basis which has not been. adopted, viz. , alphabetical order. When two or more options are available and when an option which has been exercised cannot per se be regarded as arbitrary, it will not ,be proper or justified for the court to hold that another option, which may be better, should have been exercised. Hie Government has set out the manner in which the serial number is to be assigned and preparing a list according to alphabetical order is one of the methods which is well-known. Therefore, we are unable to hold that Rule 7 is ultra vires. ( 8 ) IT was lastly contended that with regard to SC and ST the number of years for which the reservation is there is 50 years by virtue of Article 243-D (5) read with Article 334. But with regard to S. E. B. C. there is no time limit prescribed. Merely because the reservation for S. E. B. C. may be for a period longer than the reservation for SC, ST can be no ground for holding that such reservation is in any way arbitrary. ( 9 ) WE find no merit in this petition and the same is accordingly dismissed. .