The judgment established that there is no fundamental right for every student to contest student body elections, and upheld the legality of the age restriction in the Constitution of Mohan Lal Sukhadia University Students' Union 2022-23.

JUDGMENT

1. The instant writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner Jagdish Chandra Gurjar seeking the following reliefs:-

"(i) By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the effect and operation of Clause 7(a)(ii) of the Constitution of Mohan Lal Sukhadia University Students' Union 2022-23 may kindly be declared ultra vires being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and same may kindly be quashed and set aside.

(ii) By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents may kindly be directed to allow/permit the petitioner to contest election of Research Representative of Mohan Lal Sukhadia University Students' Union Elections-2022-23 scheduled to be held on 26.08.2022 by providing up to two years upper age relaxation."

2. Learned counsel Shri Sukesh Bhati, representing the petitioner, vehemently and fervently contended that the Clause 7(a)(ii) of the Constitution of University & College Students' Union 2022-23 of Mohan Lal Sukhadia University (hereinafter referred to as 'Constitution of MLSU 2022-23') is illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional inasmuch as it curtails the rights of the students to contest election for the post of Research Representative after crossing the age of 28 years. He submits that elections were not held for the Research Representatives for the previous two years owing to the Covid pandemic and thus, the relaxation provided by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the matter of in Re: cognizance for extension of limitation (Miscellaneous Application No. 21 of 2022 in Miscellaneous Application No. 665 of 2021 in suo motu Writ Petition (c) No. 3 of 2020), deserves to be applied to the forthcoming students election. The said upper age limit deserves to be extended and for this purpose, the upper age eligibility criterion under Clause 7(a)(ii) of the Constitution of MLSU 2022-23 should be struck down.

3. In support of his contentions, Shri Bhati has placed reliance on the Supreme Court judgment in the case of University of Kerala v. Council, Principals, Colleges, Kerala and Ors. [(2011) 14 SCC 363] and urges that in the said judgment, Hon'ble the Supreme Court approved the recommendations of the Lyngdoh Committee, wherein it has been recommended that the maximum age limit for which the students can legitimately contest the elections should be enhanced to 30 years. He urges that the situation in the present scenario is very harsh because the elections were not held for the previous two years owing to the Covid pandemic and thus, the age relaxation is required to be extended and consequently, a provisional direction be issued to permit the petitioner, who is presently aged about 28 years, to contest the election for the Research Representative post.

4. Per contra, learned counsel Shri Rajesh Punia and Shri Himanshu Shrimali, representing the respondents, vehemently and fervently contended that there is no vested legal or fundamental right of the petitioner to contest the election. They drew the Court's attention to the order dated 31.07.2013 passed by a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Shrikant Shrivastava v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. [D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8951/2013 decided on 31.07.2013], wherein an exactly similar clause of age limit as was prevailing in the Constitution of Students' Union at the relevant point of time was approved after taking into account the judgment in the case of University of Kerala (supra).

5. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the submissions advanced at bar.

6. The relevant clause 7(a)(ii) of the Constitution of MLSU 2022-23 is reproduced hereinbelow for ready reference:-

"7. a. ii. For Research Representative the maximum age limit to legitimately contest an election would be 28 years and they can contest election only for Research Representative of the Apex/Central Students' Union provided they have deposited requisite fee in the University."

7. We are of the firm view that every student admitted into a College/University does not have fund