Jaipur: State govt has fixed Sept 23 and 24 for the reservation lottery for various Panchayati Raj posts, after postponing the process originally scheduled for Sept 17-18 because district collectors and sub-divisional officers are engaged in the ongoing urban local body elections.The lottery for Zila Parishad members, pradhans and Panchayat Samiti members will be held on Sept 23, while that for sarpanchs and ward panchs will be conducted on Sept 24, according to an order issued by Panchayati Raj department.The department directed all district collectors and sub-divisional officers to ensure that the reservation determination process is conducted on the specified dates. Govt said the exercise was being undertaken in compliance with Rajasthan High Court’s July 20 order and reiterated its commitment to complete the Panchayati Raj election process by Nov 15, 2026.The reservation lottery for the posts of district heads of district councils was already completed on Aug 13, the department said. The remaining district-level and sub-divisional-level reservation exercises will now be taken up on Sept 23 and 24, respectively.The fresh schedule comes amid a controversy over the extent of OBC reservation in the Panchayati Raj elections. State govt had earlier defended its reservation framework before High Court, saying OBC reservation had been determined through a lottery based on the recommendations of OBC Commission.Govt, in its reply before the court, said OBC Commission had arrived at its recommendations after conducting a door-to-door survey and analysing available demographic data. It also maintained that SC, ST and OBC reservations had been provided within the 50% ceiling prescribed by Supreme Court and, therefore, OBC reservation could not be increased beyond the prescribed limit.The issue had come under High Court’s scrutiny after the number of Zila Pramukh posts increased from 33 to 41 following district reorganisation, while the number of posts reserved for OBC candidates did not rise proportionately. A petition filed by an individual had challenged the reservation position, contending that OBCs had not received the prescribed proportionate reservation following the increase in the number of districts.
