AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
5 paragraphs · 184 wordsN.S.Sanjay Gowda, J
It is not in dispute that a preliminary order regarding allocation of reservation was made on 27.2.2026 and to this preliminary order, the petitioner and the others did file objections on 3.3.2026 and 5.3.3026.
The consultation of the political parties, as provided under the Rules was conducted on 10.3.2026 and thereafter, on 12.3.2026, the revised preliminary order was issued.
Learned counsel appearing for the Election Commission states that no objections or suggestions were filed to this revised preliminary order by the petitioner and, therefore, the petitioner is estopped from challenging the reservations allocated under this order.
In our view, in the light of the decision already rendered by this Court on 1.4.2026 in Special Civil Application No.4101 of 2026, wherein it is held that if objections/ suggestions are not made to the preliminary order, such a person cannot challenge the final order that is passed by the Election Commission. In light of this legal position, the present writ petition is DISMISSED since the petitioner has not chosen to file objections or suggestions to the revised preliminary order.