Point of Law: Whenever the process of election starts, normally courts should not interfere with the process of election for the simple reason that if the process of election is interfered with by the courts, possibly no election would be completed without the court's order. Very often, for frivolous reasons candidates or others approach the courts and by virtue of interim orders passed by courts, the election is delayed or cancelled and in such a case the basic purpose of having election and getting an elected body to run the administration is frustrated. Therefore, all disputes with regard to election should be dealt with only after completion of the election. In the present case, the High Court was not right in interfering with the process of election especially when the process of election had started upon publication of the election programme and more particularly when an alternative statutory remedy was available to Respondent 1 by way of referring the dispute to the Central Government as per the provisions of Section 5 of the Act read with Regulation 20 of the Regulations

JUDGMENT :

N.V. ANJARIA, J.

1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Hriday Buch for the appellants, learned senior advocate Mr. Prakash Jani with learned advocate Mr. Archit Jani for respondent No. 3, learned advocate Mr. Devang Vyas assisted by learned advocate Mr. Siddharth Dave for respondent No. 2 University and learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. Rohan Shah for respondent- State, at length.

2. The challenge in this Letters Patent Appeal is addressed to judgment and order dated 18th January, 2021 passed by learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No. 632 of 2021, whereby the said petition came to be dismissed for the reasons recorded in the judgment. In the Special Civil Application, jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution was invoked by the petitioners seeking issuance of writ to set aside Notification dated 04th January, 2021 of the respondent No. 2-Hemchandracharya North Gujarat University. By the said Notification, the election programme for election of two members in the council of the University from the University Court, also known as Senate, was declared. It was further prayed to direct the University to hold such elections only after vacant seats of the members to the court are filled up.

3. The elections to the two members notified as per the impugned notification is in view of the provision of Section 19(1)(vii) of the Hemchandracharya North Gujarat University Act, 1986. The Section provides that Executive Council shall be the executive authority of the university and shall consist of the members specified in Clause (i) to Clause (ix). Clause (vii) provides about two persons to be elected by the court from amongst its members who are not teachers or members of the teaching staff of the university, affiliated colleges, recognised institutions and approved institutions and students. Section 15 under Chapter IV of the Act mentioned the authorities of the university. The court is one of the authorities of the court mentioned in the said Section. Under Section 16, it is stated that the court shall consist two classes. Class I ex-officio members and Class II ordinary members elected as specified in the provision of Section 16. Section 76 of the Act says that the proceedings shall not invalidated by vacancies. It provides that no act or proceeding of any authority or other body of the University shall be invalidated merely by reason of any vacancy in its membership. Another is Section 77 which is in relation to the disputes as to constitution of University Authority or body.

4. The main premise and the contention on which the grievance and the prayer in the petition are rested are that the court of the University which would be the electoral body, has vacancies almost to the extent of one-fourth of the total. It was to be highlighted by learned advocate for the appellants that out of the total strength of 100 members in the court, 23 seats are vacant. These 23 seats, it was submitted, include the registered graduates of all faculties of the University, members to be nominated by the Panchayat and the Municipality etc. It was submitted that furthermore, there was dispute about the nomination of 17 students as well as Deans. With reference to such aspects pleaded it was submitted that the vacancies in the court would result into deprivation of participation in the election. It was submitted that the membership of the court has been kept cosmetic to suit the convenience by the authorities. It was further submitted that in such a situation the principle of votes by proportional representation, which is to be the method for electing would be adversely affected.

4.1 Learned advocate for the appellants further submitted that despite the fact position that 23 seats in the court are vacant, the University proceeded to publish the election programme for election of two members to the Executive Council. Describing the election notification as an hurriedly taken step, it was submitted that the term of the Council is due t