JUDGMENT - B.H. MARLAPALLE, J.:---Heard learned Counsel for the respective parties. Rule, By consent of the parties, rule made returnable forthwith. 2. The facts of the case shortly mentioned are as under : The Ahmednagar Municipal Council has been devided in 48 wards. The ward elections for the Ahmednagar Municipal Council were held on 1-11-1996 and out of 48 wards, in all 9 wards namely Ward No. 2, 11, 15, 18, 22, 25, 35, 37 and 40 were reserved for the persons belonging to other Backward class category. The petitioner No. 1 was elected from Ward No. 2 whereas the petitioner No. 2 was elected from Ward No. 40 and both the wards were reserved for other Backward Class citizens. Both the petitioners belong to the other Backward Class category whereas the respondent No. 4, though belongs to other Backward Class category, contested elections from Ward No. 16 and got elected from the said ward which was earmarked for general category as it was not a ward reserved for either Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribes, other Backward Class or woman-category. The Collector, Ahmednagar issued order bearing No. MUN-Desk-/6-A/1285/95 and the seat of President of Ahmednagar Municipal Council came to be reserved for O.B.C. category in the first year. The election to the post of the President was scheduled on 17-12-1996 and for the first year the office of the President was reserved for the member belonging to O.B.C. category. It is pertinent to note at this stage that though there are 9 Councillors including the present two petitioners, who have been elected from the wards reserved for O.B.C. category, none of them filed nomination for contesting the election of the President of Ahmednagar Municipal Council and the respondent No. 4 had filed his nomination though he belongs to O.B.C. community but was not elected from the ward which was reserved for O.B.C. category. The respondent No. 4 thus got elected as President of Ahmednagar Municipal Council in the elections held on 17-12-1996 and therefore, the petitioners have approached this Court challenging the said election of the respondent No. 4 as a President, which was reserved for the O.B.C. category in the first year by rotation. 3. Article 243-T of the Constitution provides for reservation of seats in self-governing institutions constituted under Article 243-0. 3. Article 243-T of the Constitution provides for reservation of seats in self-governing institutions constituted under Article 243-0. Article 243-T(4) states that the offices of Chairpersons in the Municipalities shall be reserved for the Scheduled Castes, the Scheduled Tribes and Woman in such a manner as the Legislature of a State may, by law, provide. Article 243-T(6) says that nothing in this part shall prevent the Legislature of a State from making any provision for reservation of seats in any Municipality or offices of Chairpersons in the Municipalities in favour of Backward class of citizens. Accordingly, the Legislature of the State enacted necessary provisions by inserting the necessary amendments in the Maharashtra Municipalities Act, 1965 which is now named as Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats Act, 1965. Section 10 of the Act provides for division of Municipal area into wards and reservation of wards for woman, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, and other Backward Classes. Section 51-1A of the Act provides that the office of the President shall be reserved for the Scheduled Castes, the Scheduled Tribes, Woman and the Backward Class of citizens in the prescribed manner. 4. The State Government has made necessary amendments to the Maharashtra Municipal Councils and Nagar Panchayats (President Election) Rules, 1981 laying down the manner of reservation to the post of President for woman, Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other Backward Classes. Rule 2(a) of the amended Rules provides that the Collector of each District shall, by order published in the Official Gazette, reserve for a period of 10 years, commencing from the first election of the President after the date of commencement of the Maharashtra Municipalities (President Election) (Amendment) Rules, 1995, the office of the President of each of the Municipal Council, or, as the case may be, Nagar Panchayat, in the District, for the Scheduled Castes, the Scheduled Tribes, the Backward Class of citizens and woman as prescribed in sub-rules (2) to (5). Sub-rule (2) to (5) provide for reservation to the post of President by rotation. As per the order published by the Collector of Ahmednagar District the post of President of Ahmednagar Municipal Council is reserved for the other Backward Class for the first year. 5. Sub-rule (2) to (5) provide for reservation to the post of President by rotation. As per the order published by the Collector of Ahmednagar District the post of President of Ahmednagar Municipal Council is reserved for the other Backward Class for the first year. 5. The only question for our consideration is whether the respondent No. 4 was eligible to contest and get elected as President of Ahmednagar Municipal Council, which was reserved for the other Backward Class category for the first year by rotation. In support of their challenge, the petitioners have relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of (Sarswati Devi v. Shanti Devi)1, reported in 1997(1) S.C.C. 122 . The legal issue raised for our consideration in this petition is no more res integra in view of our judgments in the case of (Abdul Rashid Khan Mamoo s/o Abdul Hamid Khan v. State of Maharashtra and six others)2, Writ Petition No. 1478 of 1997 reported in 1998(1) Bom.C.R. 41 (A.B) and (Parvatibai w/o Madhavrao Molddewad v. State of Maharashtra and others)3, Writ petition No. 846 of 1997 reported in 1998(1) Bom.C.R. 31 (A.B). 6. The case of Abdul Rashid Khan Mamoo was pertaining to the elections to the post of Mayor of Aurangabad Municipal Corporation in which it was contended by the petitioner, who belongs to the Scheduled Tribes category, that the said post of Mayor having been reserved for Scheduled Tribes category, any Corporator or Corporators who were elected either from open category or any other category, were not eligible to contest the election to the post of Mayor. The respondents No. 5 and 6 in the said case claimed that they were eligible to contest the election to the post of Mayor though they did not get elected from the wards reserved for Scheduled Tribes category but they belong to the caste which fall in the Scheduled Tribes category. The respondents No. 5 and 6 in the said case claimed that they were eligible to contest the election to the post of Mayor though they did not get elected from the wards reserved for Scheduled Tribes category but they belong to the caste which fall in the Scheduled Tribes category. Relying upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Sarswati Devi (supra) and on perusal of the scheme of Article 243-T of the Constitution and the provisions of the Maharashtra Municipal Corporations (Reservation of Offices of Mayor) Rules, 1994 as well as section 19(1-A) of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949, we have held that the respondents No. 5 and 6 - Corporators were not eligible to contest the elections to the post of Mayor which was at the relevant time reserved for the Scheduled Tribe category as the said respondents were not elected as Corporators from the ward reserved for Scheduled Tribe category. We are informed by the learned A.G.P. that the said judgment delivered by us on 28th April, 1997 came to be challenged before the Supreme Court of India by filing Special Leave Petition and the said Special Leave Petition was rejected. 7. The second case, namely Parvatibai Molddewad's case pertain to the elections of the President of Municipal Council, Mukhed under the Maharashtra Municipalities Act, 1965. We have held vide our judgment dated 30-4-1997 that if the post of President was reserved for O.B.C. category, a Councillor who was not elected from a ward reserved for O.B.C. category, is not eligible to contest the said election so long as the post of President was reserved for O.B.C. category. This second judgment is directly applicable to the instant case and we re-affirm our view that if the post of President is reserved for a particular category, any Councillor who is not elected from a ward reserved for that particular category, is not eligible to contest such election so long as it is reserved by rotation, for such to category. We, therefore, hold that the respondent No. 4 was not eligible to contest the election of the President of Ahmednagar Municipal Council and the decision of the Returning Officer accepting the nomination form of the respondent No. 4 was illegal. Said respondent is therefore directed to vacate the office of the President of Ahmednagar Municipal Council forthwith. 8. We, therefore, hold that the respondent No. 4 was not eligible to contest the election of the President of Ahmednagar Municipal Council and the decision of the Returning Officer accepting the nomination form of the respondent No. 4 was illegal. Said respondent is therefore directed to vacate the office of the President of Ahmednagar Municipal Council forthwith. 8. Our attention was drawn to the fact that no Councillor who been elected from the wards reserved for O.B.C. category had filed nomination form to contest the election for the post of President of Ahmednagar Municipal Council and even the present petitioner also did not file their nomination forms for the said post though they were eligible to contest the elections for the post of President. It is true that no Councillor elected from the wards reserved for O.B.C. category had filed nomination forms to contest the election for the post of President of Ahmednagar Municipal Council and the first proviso to Rule 2(c) of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats (President Election) Rules, 1995 has envisaged such a situation and the procedure has been prescribed in such a contingency. We, accordingly direct the Collector of Ahmednagar District to take steps according to the Rules for the re-election of the post of President of Ahmednagar Municipal Council and complete the said process of election within a period of eight weeks from today. 9. In the result, petition is allowed and the rule is made absolute accordingly. Petition dismissed.