IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
RAVINDRA MAITHANI, J.
Aakib Ahmed - Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and Others - Respondents
Writ Petition (M/S) No. 2626 of 2023
Decided On : 19-09-2023
Age Relaxation - Student Union Election - WP 2167 of 2022 - The court discussed the provisions of age relaxation for contesting the election of the student union of the college, as per the judgment and order dated 8.9.2022 in WP 2167 of 2022, Ankit Bisht Vs. State and Others. The court interpreted the previous order granting two years' age relaxation and its applicability to the current case, ultimately dismissing the writ petition.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought age relaxation to contest the election of the student union of DAV PG College, Dehradun, citing the previous order dated 8.9.2022 in WP 2167 of 2022, Ankit Bisht Vs. State and Others, which granted two years' age relaxation due to the COVID-19 pandemic preventing the election from being held.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the previous order granting two years' age relaxation was not applicable to the current case, as it was a one-time relaxation due to the specific circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, the court dismissed the writ petition at the stage of admission.
Issues: The issues involved the interpretation of the previous order granting age relaxation and its applicability to the current case, as well as the petitioner's entitlement to age relaxation for contesting the election.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the previous order granting two years' age relaxation was a one-time relaxation due to the COVID-19 pandemic and was not applicable to the current case. The interpretation of the previous order was crucial in determining the petitioner's entitlement to age relaxation.
Final Decision: The petition was dismissed in limine at the stage of admission, as the court found no merit in the writ petition.
JUDGMENT :
Ravindra Maithani, J.
By means of this writ petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs:-
(ii) Issue writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing the respondents to grant 02 years age relaxation to petitioner in upper age limit for contesting the election of student union of DAV PG College Dehradun in the light of judgment and order dated 8.9.2022 in WP 2167 of 2022, Ankit Bisht Vs. State and Others.
(iii) To pass any other/further suitable order which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.
(iv) Award the cost of writ petition to the petitioner.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
3. It is the case of the petitioner that he is a student in DAV (PG) College, Dehradun (“the college”). For the last eight years, he has been preparing to contest the election of student union of the college. Due to COVID-19 pandemic, in the year 2020-2021 and 2021-2022, the election could not be held. The age limit for contesting election of student union is 22 years for undergraduate students, 25 years for post graduate students and 28 years for PhD students. The petitioner has crossed the age of 25 years. There is no PhD programme in the college, therefore, he is not able to contest the election.
4. It is also the case of the petitioner that a similar controversy had arisen in the year 2022, when Writ Petition (M/S) No. 2167 of 2022, Ankit Bisht Vs. State of Uttarakhand and Others, (“the first petition”) was filed in this Court seeking two years’ age relaxation for contesting the election of the student union of the college, which was allowed by the Court on 08.09.2022, by which two years’ relaxation was given. The petitioner seeks relaxation of age in this case also on the ground that it is the second year after the order of the Court passed in the first petition, i.e. on 08.09.2022.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in the first petition, the Court had considered the situation of COVID-19 pandemic, due to which the election could not be held for the student ]union in the college and directed the college authorities to grant age relaxation of two years for the purpose of participating in the election of the student union of the college. Therefore, it is argued that the petitioner is also entitled to get age relaxation in compliance with the order dated 08.09.2022 passed in the first petition.
6. In the first petition, the following prayers were sought by the petitioner of that case:-
b. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing the respondents to decide the representation of petitioner.”
7. After hearing the parties, the Court passed the following order:-
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 prec
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 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 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 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.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.