ORDER : 1. The petitioner by way of this writ petition challenges the order dated 12.02.2019 issued by the Joint Secretary (Legal), Urban Development & Panchayat Raj Department whereby on account of resignation of the present Pradhan (Shri Harendra Ninama) of the Panchayat Samiti, Ghatol, who was elected as an M.L.A., the State Government has nominated one Smt. Jeevani, who is the Member of the concerned Panchayat Samiti to take over the charge of the post of Pradhan till regulation is conducted. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner - Sena Kumari, who is also one of the elected Member of the Panchayat Samiti, Ghatol submits that the petitioner belongs to Bhartiya Janta Party (BJP), who has a majority in the Panchayat Samiti, while the respondent No. 7 – Smt. Jeevani was from Congress Party, who was having minority in strength in the Panchayat Samiti, Ghatol and, therefore, a Member from a party which had minority in the Panchayat Samiti could not have been nominated for taking over the charge of the post of Pradhan by the competent authority and the powers exercised was illegal and unjustified. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner also takes this Court to the provisions of Section 25 (1) of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act of 1994’) which reads as under:- “25. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner also takes this Court to the provisions of Section 25 (1) of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act of 1994’) which reads as under:- “25. Handing over of charge.- (1) Whenever the election of a member or Chairperson or Deputy Chairperson of a Panchayati Raj Institution has been declared to be void, or whenever such member or Chairperson or Deputy Chairperson - (i) is not found qualified or becomes disqualified under Sec.19 to hold his office, or (ii) ceases to be so under the provisions of this Act, or (iii) fails to make the prescribed oath or affirmation in accordance with the provisions of this Act, or (iv) is removed from office or is suspended under Sec. 38; or (v) resigns his office under Sec. 36, or Whenever a motion of no-confidence is passed against the Chairperson or the Deputy Chairperson of a Panchayati Raj Institution under Sec. 37; or Whenever the term of office of a Panchayati Raj Institution expires or the election of all the members of Panchayati Raj Institution with or without the Chairperson has been declared void, or such election or the proceedings subsequent thereto have been stayed by an order of a competent Court; or Whenever a Panchayati Raj Institution is dissolved under this Act, such member or Chairperson or Deputy Chairperson or all any of them shall forthwith handover charge in the prescribed manner of his or their office including all papers and properties pertaining to such office in his or their actual possession or occupation- (a) in the case of a member, to the Chairperson of the Panchayati Raj Institution concerned; (b) in the case of Chairperson, to the Deputy Chairperson of such Panchayati Raj Institution or, where there is no Deputy Chairperson, to such member of such Panchayati Raj Institution or other person as the competent authority may direct 1. [;] 2. [;] 2. [Provided that charge of office of any Chairperson who was elected to an office reserved for the persons belonging to Scheduled Castes or the Scheduled Tribes or the Backward Classes or for Women, shall be handed over as per directions of the Competent Authority, to a member, if any, of the said Castes, Tribes or Classes or a Woman member, as the case may be, in the manner as may be prescribed and where there is no such member belonging to said Castes, Tribes, Classes or a Woman member to whom charge can be given as aforesaid, the charge shall be handed over in the manner as may be prescribed, to any member not belonging to the aforesaid categories.] (c) in the case of a Deputy Chairperson, to the Chairperson of the Panchayati Raj Institution concerned or, where there is no such Chairperson, to such member of such Panchayati Raj Institution or other person as the competent authority may direct;” 2. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that as the post of Pradhan was reserved for the Scheduled Tribe the petitioner is also belongs to the Scheduled Tribe category, therefore, she ought to have been nominated by the competent authority. He submits that the procedure, as required for election of the Pradhan itself, ought to have been taken note of while making nominations and departure thereto would be contrary to the democratic norms. He relies upon the judgment of the Allahabad High Court in the case of Farida W/O Aquil Vs. State of U.P. & Ors., Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 64313/2009, decided on 8th January, 2010. Learned counsel for the petitioner also relies upon the judgment passed by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Govinda Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors., reported in 2010 (1) WLC (Raj.) 398 to submit that on account of the vacancy arisen on account of death or otherwise, the appointment of another person on the post of Sarpanch can only be of a person who commands majority in his favour. 3. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 7 – Smt. Jeevani, who has entered as a caveator, submits that the power under Section 25 of the Act of 1994 is only with regard to handing over of the charge and is not for the purpose of election of Pradhan. 3. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 7 – Smt. Jeevani, who has entered as a caveator, submits that the power under Section 25 of the Act of 1994 is only with regard to handing over of the charge and is not for the purpose of election of Pradhan. It is the submission of the learned counsel that even under Section 34 of the Act of 1994, the powers will be exercised by such Member, as the competent authority may direct. He also takes this Court to the provisions of Section 36 of the Act of 1994 to buttress his submissions. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent has relied upon the judgment passed by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Vikramjeet Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors., reported in 2003 (3) DNJ [Raj.] 1136 to submit that such an action, of taking over of the charge, would not come within the vice of arbitrariness. He also relies upon the judgment passed by the coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Babu Lal Meena Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors., S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4871/2017, decided on 18th April, 2017 to submit that the charge of a vacant post of Sarpanch under Section 25 of the Act of 1994 should be given only to a person who was eligible but the qualification or exercise is not required to be conducted at the stage. 5. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the submissions raised at bar by the learned counsels for the parties and I find that the language of Section 25 of the Act of 1994 speaks about handing over of the charge and the power has been given to the competent authority to hand over the charge to a person, who is eligible. If the post of Pradhan is meant for a Member of Scheduled Tribe then the Member from that category would be held to be eligible and if it is a woman member, it would go to the Woman Member only. 6. Having considered the submissions and perused the record of the case, a question arises for consideration, as to whether, the charge of the Office of Pradhan could be handed over only to a Member having majority support or to any person, who is being nominated by the competent authority ? 7. 6. Having considered the submissions and perused the record of the case, a question arises for consideration, as to whether, the charge of the Office of Pradhan could be handed over only to a Member having majority support or to any person, who is being nominated by the competent authority ? 7. To answer the aforesaid question, it would also be appropriate to have a look to Section 28 of the Act of 1994 which reads under:- “Section 28. Election of Pradhan and Up-Pradhan.- (1) The elected members of the Panchayat Samiti shall, as soon as may be, choose two members from amongst themselves to be respectively the Pradhan and Up-Pradhan thereof, and so often as there is a casual vacancy in the office of Pradhan or Up-Pradhan, they shall choose another member from amongst themselves to be the Pradhan or Up-Pradhan as the case may be: Provided that no election shall be held if a vacancy is for a period of less than one month. (2) The election of Pradhan and Up-Pradhan and the filling up of the vacancies in the said offices shall be in accordance with such rules as may be made.” 8. Rule 59 of the Election Rules of 1994 would also throw light on this aspect and it would be more appropriate to quote Rule 59 (1) of the Election Rules of 1994 for this purpose, which reads as under:- “Rule.59. Election of Pradhan-(1) The Pradhan of a Panchayat Samiti shall be chosen by the elected members of the Panchayat Samiti from amongst themselves.” 9. Having noted the above provisions, it is apparent that a post of Pradhan is not to be left unfilled. In view of the provisions of Section 28 of the Act of 1994 stating that if a Pradhan resigns for any reasons or the post of Pradhan has fallen vacant, it would be termed as “Casual Vacancy” and, therefore, the same process as required for election of Pradhan, would have to be followed for filling-up the casual vacancy. 10. The view has been taken by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Govinda (supra) wherein, the High Court has passed the following order:- “13. 10. The view has been taken by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Govinda (supra) wherein, the High Court has passed the following order:- “13. Consequently, the impugned order dated 02.07.2009 is quashed and set aside and writ petition is being disposed of with the following directions to the respondent State:- (i) that as the appointment and handing over charge to respondent No.6 has been set aside, new Sarpanch amongst the reserve category of panchas of the Gram Panchayat to which the deceased Sarpanch belonged, should be appointed and handed over the charge within a period of 15 days from today. (ii) that a meeting of the Gram Panchayat, Kasba Shahar shall be called immediately for the purpose to ascertain/determine as to which of the panchas belonging to the reserve class of the deceased Sarpanch, holds the majority in the Gram Panchayat, Kasba Shahar. (iii) that the panch of the reserved class who is found to be having the majority in the Gram Panchayat shall be appointed and charge of the post of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Kasba Shahar be handed over for the remaining term which is to come to an end in the month of January, 2010. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs.” 11. However, the process of conducting Election is to be followed which requires a particular period of time for issuing of notice and calling of meeting of all the Members, it is during this intervening period, the competent authority by exercising powers under Section 25 of the Act of 1994, would nominate any elected Member to take over the charge of the office of Pradhan. 12. In my considered opinion and in view of the law laid down by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Babu Lal Meena Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (supra), it is amply clear that handing over the charge does not create any right in favour of any Member and by merely holding the charge, he or she does not become a Pradhan of the Panchayat Samiti concerned. Thus, it is only a working arrangement for the temporary handling of the works of the Panchayati Samiti. (supra), it is amply clear that handing over the charge does not create any right in favour of any Member and by merely holding the charge, he or she does not become a Pradhan of the Panchayat Samiti concerned. Thus, it is only a working arrangement for the temporary handling of the works of the Panchayati Samiti. It is co-terminus with the election of Pradhan by following the process, as required under Section 28 of the Act of 1994 and under Rule 59 of the Election Rules of 1994. The power under Section 25 of the Act of 1994 is available to the competent authority to nominate a Member of the Panchayat Samiti for the said purpose. 13. The judgment cited by the learned counsel for the petitioner in the case of Farida W/O Aquil Vs. State of U.P. & Ors., Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 64313/2009, decided on 8th January, 2010 is with regard to the regular election on a casual vacancy. Similar is the view taken by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Govind (supra). Thus, no exception can be made to the order impugned dated 12.02.2019 and only the charge has been handed over for temporary working arrangement. If the competent authority has nominated the respondent No. 7 – Smt. Jeevani in terms of provisions under Section 25 of the Act of 1994, the same is held to be legal and proper. 14. However, the Certificate issued by the B.D.O. stating that the Code of Conduct has been applied vide order dated 14.02.2019 and, therefore, regular meeting for electing a Pradhan against the casual vacancy, which has arisen on account of resignation of the existing Pradhan Harendra Ninama, on being elected as a MLA cannot be convened, is held to be unjustified. 15. In matters relating to local bodies, it is essential that fundamental principles of democracy are maintained. The District Collector, Udaipur and the BDO concerned are, therefore, required to issue Notification for the purpose of immediate election of the Pradhan in the concerned Panchayat Samiti from the existing Members for filling up the casual vacancy. 16. 15. In matters relating to local bodies, it is essential that fundamental principles of democracy are maintained. The District Collector, Udaipur and the BDO concerned are, therefore, required to issue Notification for the purpose of immediate election of the Pradhan in the concerned Panchayat Samiti from the existing Members for filling up the casual vacancy. 16. Hence, while upholding the order impugned dated 12.02.2019 of handing over of the charge to the respondent No. 7 – Smt. Jeevani, the respondents are directed to immediately notify the election for the post of Pradhan in terms of Section 28 of the Act of 1994, arising out of the resignation of the existing Pradhan Shri Harendra Ninama, on being elected as a MLA, for the Panchayat Samiti, Ghatol. 17. The exercise aforesaid shall be conducted positively within a period of seven days henceforth and the election shall be accordingly done by convening the meeting of the Members on the basis of assessing the majority. 18. The instant writ petition stands disposed of with the foregoing observations, directions and requirements.