the Bombay Land Revenue Code, 1879. Government have no intention to dissolve any District Panchayat or Taluka Panchayat and to appoint Administrator. Geographical boundaries of certain Districts and Talukas were changed. Six new Districts were carved out and 46 new Talukas have been constituted. The reorganisation of Districts and Talukas affected the geographical boundaries of 12 existing Districts. Consequently, the geographical boundaries of 18 existing Districts underwent change. Likewise, by reconstitution of 46 new Talukas, boundaries of nearly 80 Talukas were affected. So far, no order has been issued regarding the division or reconstitution of new District Panchayats and Taluka Panchayats. Orders in terms of provisions contained in Section 264 of the Gujarat Panchayats Act, 1993 have to be issued, constituting or reconstituting District Panchayats and Taluka Panchayats. Reorganisation of Districts and Talukas and consequent change in the boundaries of District Panchayats and Taluka Panchayats do not constitute delimitation of constituencies in the Panchayat and so, Section 16 of the Gujarat Panchayats Act has no relevance to the issue before the Court. 9. Article 243(a) of the Constitution defines district' as meaning a District in a State. Clause (d) of that Article defines Panchayat' as "an institution of selfgovernment constituted under Article 243-B, for the rural areas. As per clause (e), "Panchayat area" means "the territorial area of a Panchayat". According to clause (g), `village' means "a village specified by the Governor by public notification to be a village". Article 243-B deals with constitution of Panchayats. It states that there should be constituted in every State, Panchayats at the village, intermediate and district levels. The said constitution of the Panchayat must be in relation to the Panchayat area. That area is to be at village level, intermediate level, i.e. Taluka level, and District level. What should be the village is to be decided by the Governor or the State Government by Notification in the Gazette. As per the constitutional provision, the Panchayat area so constituted should be an institution of self-government. That institution of self-government should not be interfered with. By reconstitution of the Panchayat area, if any portion of that area falls outside the jurisdiction of an institution of self-government, that will violate the Constitutional mandate. If no part of the Panchayat area, on reconstitution or reorganization, falls outside the institution of self-government, such reconstitution or reorganisation cannot be faulted. Petitioners have no case that on reorganization of the Districts, portion of the area, which was taken out of one District and attached to another District, is taken out of an institution of self-government. By reorganisation of Districts, some portion of the area, comprised in one District Panchayat, becomes attached to another District Panchayat. The area, which thus becomes attached to the new District Panchayat, will continue to be under an institution of self-government, which exists in relation to the new District. In other words, by the
