IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.

FRIDAY, THE 12^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2024 / 22ND POUSHA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 39707 OF 2023 PETITIONER/S:

1 FAISAL IBRAYINTE PURAKKAL AGED 23 YEARS S/O HANEEFA IBRAYINTE PURAKKAL HOUSE VAKKAD P O MALAPPURAM-, PIN - 676502 2 ANSEERA BEEGHUM P V AGED 23 YEARS D/O MOHAMMED ASHRAF P V PALAKKAVALAPPIL, VATTAPARAMBIL HOUSE, CHENNARA P O MALAPPURAM, PIN - 676561

3 KAMARIYA SANA K AGED 22 YEARS D/O IBRAHIM KARUVATHIL HOUSE, CHULLIPARA MALAPPURAM-, PIN - 676508 BY ADVS.

P.E.SAJAL AJAS K.S.

RESPONDENT/S:

1 THE RETURNING OFFICER THUNJATH EZHUTHACHAN MALAYALAM UNIVERSITY VAVAKKAD, THIRUR, MALAPPURAM-, PIN - 676502

2 VICE CHANCELLOR THUNJATH EZHUTHACHAN MALAYALAM UNIVERSITY VAVAKKAD, THIRUR, MALAPPURAM-, PIN - 676502

3 ELECTION GRIEVANCE REDRESSAL CELL REPRESENTED BY DEAN/PROFESSOR, THUNJATH EZHUTHACHAN MALAYALAM UNIVERSITY VAVAKKAD, THIRUR, MALAPPURAM-, PIN -

676502

4 THUNJATH EZHUTHACHAN MALAYALAM UNIVERSITY REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR VAVAKKAD, THIRUR, MALAPPURAM-, PIN - 676502 BY ADV P.C SASIDHARAN, SC FOR R1 to R4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON

09.01.2024, THE COURT ON 12.01.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

MOHAMMED NIAS C.P., J .........................................................……..

W.P(C) No.39707 of 2023 ..........................................................……..

Dated this the 12^th day of January, 2024

O R D E R

Petitioners are the students of Thunjath Ezhuthachan Malayalam University, the 4^th respondent herein. The 1^st respondent Returning O issued a Notification dated 22.11.2023, intimating Union Election for the year 2023-2024, Ext.P1. The schedule of the election was set out in Ext.P1. The petitioners had decided to participate in the election. The 1^st petitioner submitted his nomination to the post of General Secretary on 24.11.2023 before 12 p.m., the stipulated time. The 1^st petitioner came to know that his nomination was rejected, and he enquired the reason for the same with the 1^st respondent. No reason was given to him. Thereafter, on 25.11.2023 a representation was given by him for knowing the reason for rejection. The 2^nd and 3^rd petitioners had also Chairperson and Sports Secretary. Though they filled their nominations and in the column where the Finance Officer and the Director of the 2nd respondent University had also signed and were standing in the queue for submitting their nomination papers, the college authorities came to the queue and issued tokens only to 16 students randomly and that the same was not given to the 2^nd and 3^rd petitioners. Accordingly, the 2^nd and 3^rd petitioners could not submit their nomination papers and the 1^st respondent had denied the right of the petitioners to participate in the election. It is stated that the election rules issued by the 1^st respondent, dated nil, is Ext.P4, which does not speak of any token instruction. The petition was submitted by the 2^nd petitioner on behalf of the 3^rd petitioner as well on 24.11.2023, pointing out the above. The 2^nd petitioner had also moved the 2^nd respondent to get the reason for not providing tokens and not accepting their nomination papers. The 2^nd petitioner had also submitted a complaint to the 3^rd respondent on 24.11.2023. The petitioners contend that the entire election procedure was wrong as against Exts.P1 and P4 and the relevant rules. The list of candidates after scrutiny is produced as Ext.P8. The petitioners also allege that since the final candidature list could have been published on 27.11.2023 by 3 p.m. as per Ext.P1, the newspaper dated 25.11.2023, Ext.P9, showed that the students belonging to a particular union had won all the seats in the University Election. Thus, it is the contention of the petitioners that the nominations of the petitioners were rejected illegally and prayed for quashing Ext.P1 Notification and also commanding the 1^st respondent to accept the nomination