Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, J.
Rajan - Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand & Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition No. 3321 of 2022 (MS)
Decided On : 19-12-2022
Age Relaxation - Student Union Election - The court allowed the writ petition, directing the respondents to grant age relaxation to the petitioner for participating in the election of the student union due to the denial of the opportunity caused by the Covid19 pandemic.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought age relaxation to contest the election of the student union due to the denial of the opportunity caused by the Covid19 pandemic. The court acknowledged the integral role of participation in college union elections in the education and development of students' leadership qualities.
Finding of the Court:
The court allowed the writ petition, directing the respondents to grant age relaxation to the petitioner for participating in the election of the student union due to the denial of the opportunity caused by the Covid19 pandemic.
Issues: The denial of the opportunity to participate in the election of the student union due to the Covid19 pandemic and the request for age relaxation.
Ratio Decidendi: The integral role of participation in college union elections in the education and development of students' leadership qualities and the denial of this valuable right to the petitioner due to the Covid19 pandemic influenced the court's decision to grant age relaxation.
Final Decision: The court directed the respondents to grant age relaxation to the petitioner for participating in the election of the student union, setting a precedent for other candidates who have been denied the chance to participate in the election.
JUDGMENT
Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, J. - By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:
(i) Issue writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing the respondents to grant 9 month and 7 days age relaxation to the petitioner in upper age limit for contesting the election of student union of Government Degree College Chinyalisaur, Uttarkashi, Uttarakhand.
(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing the respondents to decide the representation of the petitioner.
2. There is no dispute at the Bar that because of the Covid19 pandemic, no election could be held in the college for the last two academic sessions. Therefore, the petitioner, who is a student of Government Degree College, Chinyalisaur, Uttarkashi, Uttarkhand, was denied of any chance of participating in the election as a candidate. Participation in the elections of college union is an integral part of the education, in view of the fact that an opportunity is given to the students for developing their leadership qualities and because such a valuable right has been denied to the petitioner, hence, the writ petition is allowed.
3. The respondent no. 3 is directed to grant age relaxation to the petitioner for two years for the purpose of participating in the election. This may be taken as precedent and any other candidates, who have also been denied of any chance of participating in election, may also be granted age relaxation for two years.
The denial of valuable rights due to extraordinary circumstances such as the Covid19 pandemic may warrant the granting of age relaxation to ensure equal opportunities for participation.
The central legal point established in the judgment is that age relaxation can be granted to students for participating in the student union election due to exceptional circumstances such as the COVI....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the previous order granting age relaxation was a one-time relaxation due to the specific circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic and was not ap....
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 Sukhad....
The Supreme Court's directives on age limits for student elections must be strictly followed, and non-holding of elections does not justify further relaxation of these limits.
Contesting elections for student bodies is not a fundamental right, and eligibility criteria, including age limits, can be upheld as valid.
The court considered the eligibility criteria in the student union constitution and relied on the recommendations of the Lyngdoh Committee and a previous court order to grant relief to the petitioner....
The age mentioned in the voters list should not be the sole consideration for eligibility, and the Returning Officer should independently verify the candidate's age.
The court upholds entitlement to appointment benefits based on age relaxation due to pandemic provisions, emphasizing governmental commitments.
Students challenged college elections; court mandated resolution of eligibility complaints for fair conduct.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
