Rajasthan HC stays Khatu Shyam Ji Municipality chairman election re-poll
Synopsis
The Rajasthan High Court has stayed the 25 September re-poll for the Khatu Shyam Ji Municipality Chairman's seat in Sikar, after a petition argued that votes already cast by 19 of 20 councillors should simply be counted — not discarded for a fresh round triggered by one absent member's failure to show up.
Key Takeaways
The Rajasthan High Court stayed the Khatu Shyam Ji Municipality Chairman re-poll scheduled for 25 September .
Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand passed the order on hearing a petition by councillor Vinita Punia of Ward No.
19 of 20 elected councillors had cast votes on 21 September ; the sole absentee was Lakshmi Devi of Ward No.
The Returning Officer allegedly extended voting time five times , with the process running until approximately 11:30 pm .
The Rajasthan State Election Commission had rescheduled the election for 25 September after police traced Lakshmi Devi; the Vice-Chairman election was set for 26 September .
The High Court's ruling will determine whether the votes already polled must be counted or a fresh election held.
The Rajasthan High Court on 24 September 2026 stayed the re-polling process scheduled for 25 September for the election of the Chairman of Khatu Shyam Ji Municipality in Sikar district, halting a process already mired in procedural controversy. The order was passed by a single-judge bench of Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand while hearing a petition challenging the decision to conduct a fresh election.
Background: What Triggered the Legal Challenge
Ward elections across all 20 wards of Khatu Shyam Ji Municipality were held on 9 September, with results declared on 14 September. The Chairman's election was subsequently scheduled for 21 September, with voting to run from 10 am to 2 pm, contested by two candidates including petitioner Vinita Punia, an elected councillor from Ward No. 11.
According to the petition, 19 of the 20 elected councillors cast their votes within the stipulated window. The sole absentee was Lakshmi Devi of Ward No. 10, who did not appear at the polling venue. Despite her absence, the Returning Officer allegedly extended voting time approximately five times, with the process continuing until around 11:30 pm.
The Procedural Dispute at the Heart of the Case
After voting was eventually halted, the ballot box was sealed and placed in a strong room, and the election was adjourned. The Rajasthan State Election Commission subsequently postponed the process after Lakshmi Devi failed to appear for voting.
Senior Advocate Major R.P. Singh, appearing for petitioner Vinita Punia, argued that since 19 councillors had already exercised their franchise, the correct course was to count those votes and declare a result — not restart the entire election. The petition contended that ordering a fresh election after votes had already been polled was not in accordance with the applicable rules governing such municipal elections.
State Election Commission Reschedules; Court Steps In
The Rajasthan State Election Commission rescheduled the Chairman's election for 25 September after police reportedly traced Lakshmi Devi. The Vice-Chairman election was separately scheduled for 26 September. The High Court's stay has now put both timelines in question, pending its determination of the petition challenging the election process.
What the Court Will Decide
The core legal question before Justice Dhand is whether the votes already cast by the 19 councillors on 21 September must be counted under existing rules, or whether the Election Commission acted within its powers in ordering a fresh round. The outcome will have implications not just for Khatu Shyam Ji Municipality but for the procedural framework governing municipal chairman elections across Rajasthan. The next hearing will determine the timeline for resolution.
Point of View
Repeated extensions of voting time — conflicts with the democratic finality of votes already cast? The Returning Officer's decision to extend the window five times, ostensibly for one absent councillor, and the Election Commission's subsequent order for a fresh round, raises legitimate questions about procedural consistency. If the High Court rules that the 19 cast votes must be counted, it will set a useful precedent curbing ad hoc extensions that can be exploited tactically. The broader issue is that municipal election rules in several states remain ambiguous on adjournments and re-polls, leaving room for exactly this kind of dispute.
NationPress
24 Sept 2026
Frequently Asked Questions
Why has the Rajasthan High Court stayed the Khatu Shyam Ji Municipality Chairman election?
The Rajasthan High Court stayed the re-poll scheduled for 25 September after a petition by elected councillor Vinita Punia argued that votes already cast by 19 of 20 councillors on 21 September should be counted rather than discarded for a fresh election. Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand passed the stay order on 24 September.
What happened during the original Chairman election on 21 September?
Voting was scheduled from 10 am to 2 pm, but one councillor, Lakshmi Devi of Ward No. 10, did not appear at the polling venue. The Returning Officer allegedly extended the voting window about five times, with proceedings continuing until approximately 11:30 pm before the ballot box was sealed and the election adjourned.
Who is Vinita Punia and why did she file the petition?
Vinita Punia is an elected councillor from Ward No. 11 of Khatu Shyam Ji Municipality and one of two candidates who contested the Chairman's election on 21 September. She filed the petition arguing that since 19 councillors had already voted, the applicable rules required those votes to be counted rather than a fresh election ordered.
What did the Rajasthan State Election Commission do after the original election was adjourned?
The Rajasthan State Election Commission rescheduled the Chairman's election for 25 September after police reportedly traced the absent councillor Lakshmi Devi. The Vice-Chairman election was separately scheduled for 26 September. Both timelines are now on hold following the High Court's stay order.
What is the broader legal significance of this case?
The High Court's ruling will determine whether votes already cast by 19 councillors must be counted under the rules governing municipal elections, or whether the Election Commission had the authority to order a completely fresh round. The outcome could set a precedent for how adjournments and re-polls are handled in Rajasthan's municipal election framework.
