Writ appeals by non-parties lack locus standi; rejection of student nominations for elections did not follow due process as per election bye-laws.

JUDGMENT

Muralee Krishna, J.

This is an appeal filed under Section 5 (i) of the Kerala High Court Act, 1958 , by the appellants who are third parties to W.P.(C)No.19648 of 2025, challenging the judgment dated 19.06.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in that writ petition.

2. W.P.(C)No.19648 of 2025 is filed by respondents 1 to 7 - writ petitioners under Article 226 of The Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs;

“i. Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, to set aside the Ext.P3 final candidate list, as it is illegal, arbitrary, and issued in violation of the KUHS Election Bye-laws.

ii. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents to reconsider and accept the nomination papers of the petitioners.

iii. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents to permit the petitioners to participate in the election process, including campaigning and polling.

iv. Issue a writ of mandamus or appropriate direction directing the Dean of Student Affairs, Kerala University of Health Sciences, to consider and dispose of the Ext.P4 representation submitted by the petitioners for reconsideration of their rejected nominations, in accordance with law and within a time frame fixed by this Hon'ble Court”.

3. Going by the averments in the writ petition, the respondents 1 to 7-writ petitioners are students of the School of Medical Education, Angamaly, affiliated to the Kerala University of Health Sciences (‘KUHS’ for short). They filed nominations to contest various posts in the College Union Election 2024-25, which was scheduled as per the official election schedule. Despite complying with all procedural and eligibility norms, their nominations were arbitrarily rejected by the Returning Officer on various unreasonable and unlawful grounds, including absence at scrutiny (despite no such requirement under KUHS bye-laws) and clerical errors in the application. The respondents 1 to 7 made attempts to communicate the unavoidable reasons for their absence and the clerical mistake, but were not provided any opportunity to rectify or be heard. The rejection has violated their statutory rights, the KUHS bye-laws, and fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 19 of The Constitution of India . The final candidate list dated 26.05.2025 was published, excluding their names. The respondents 1 to 7 submitted a written complaint before the Dean of Student Affairs, KUHS, requesting urgent reconsideration and acceptance of their nomination applications and the same was not considered yet.

4. On 29.05.2025, when the writ petition came up for admission, the learned Single Judge passed an interim order allowing respondents 1 to 7 - writ petitioners to participate in the College Union Election with a rider that their nomination should be clear and valid. The learned Single Judge further held that the results of the election shall be subject to the outcome of the writ petition. Though the appellants filed an impleading application in the writ petition by filing I.A.No.1 of 2025, the same was not considered by the learned Single Judge till the disposal of the writ petition.

5. On 19.06.2025, the learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition by the impugned judgment, which reads thus;

“In pursuance of the interim order dated 29.05.2025, the petitioners have already participated in the union election and their results have been declared.

In view thereof, the present writ petition is allowed, in terms of the interim