Back
2021 Supreme(Online)(KER) 23075
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
AMIT RAWAL, J
PRIYA C.P – Appellant
Versus
MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY – Respondent
WP(C)/23895/2021
PAUL JACOB (P), SHRI.SURIN GEORGE IPE, SC, M.G.UNIVERSITY
Elections conducted in accordance with statutory provisions regarding representation and remedies preclude the use of writ petitions for electoral disputes already covered by established procedures.
Headnote:
Election - Senate Election Process - Mahatma Gandhi University Act, 1985 - Sections 17(12), 43 - The court upheld the election process using multiple ballots for defined categories, interpreting provisions for proportional representation and remedies available through election petitions.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioners challenged the election results of the Senate conducted under the Mahatma Gandhi University Act, claiming the use of multiple ballot papers violated election procedures. They argued the system favored majority representation and disadvantaged minority groups.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the election procedure valid as it adhered to the statutory provisions, dismissed the maintainability of the writ petition due to the existence of an effective remedy through an election petition process.
Issues: Whether the use of multiple ballot papers for different categories violated the provisions of the Mahatma Gandhi University Act and whether the writ petition was maintainable despite the existing remedy of filing an election petition.
Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that the election process followed the requirements set forth in the Act for proportional representation and that questions raised could be better addressed through an election petition rather than a writ.
Final Decision: Writ petition dismissed due to non-maintainability.
JUDGMENT
Ext.P5 the ballet papers and declaration of the result of election to Senate dated 21.10.2021 (Ext.P9) have been challenged in this writ petition.
2. Without disclosing the credentials of petitioner No.2 in paragraph 2 it has been alleged that petitioner is a full-time student, studying for MA (Philosophy) in Maharajas College, Ernakulam affiliated with Mahatma Gandhi University and actively involved in politics and also member of Kerala Students Union (KSU) and eligible to be a candidate for the elected members to the post of the Senate of the university as per the provisions of Section 17 (12) of the Mahatma Gandhi university Act, 1985 (hereinafter called ‘Act of 1985’).
3. The University vide notification dated 02.09.2020 notified elections to the 15 elected seats to the University Senate as provided under Chapter VI, Section 43 of the 1985 Act. The Joint Registrar of the University was appointed as the Returning Officer. Sample ballet papers for the benefit of the electorate was issued as Ext.P1(a). With regard to the aforementioned elections the University published a 'factors that the voters need to know and instructions to follow' regarding the preferential voting system as evidenced from Ext.P3. Petitioner filed her nomination under Scheduled Tribe category and her nomination was cleared as her name was found to be the 3rd contestant in ST category. On 19.10.2021 University uploaded the sample ballot paper with the qualified candidates for the senate election on website Ext.P5 and on perusal of the same, it is seen that it was not in accordance with the provisions of of the Act as it was multiple ballot papers for different category instead of one ballot paper.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that the aforementioned ballot papers was in deviation from the election system followed by the University from its inception by relying upon a ballot paper for the year 2012-2013 Ext.P6. On acquiring the knowledge of the aforementioned ballot paper, the second petitioner, who is the Vice President of the Kerala Students Union (KSU) made a representation dated 19.10.2021 (Ext.P7) espousing the cause of Union and its members. An official communication of the Union was also issued to the Vice Chancellor vide Ext.P8. Despite that elections were held on the appointed date and the result has been declared vide Ext.P9. Though Statute 87 under Chapter 44 of Mahatma Gandhi University Statutes, 1997 (hereinafter called ‘1997 Statutes’) provides a remedy of election petition but no detailed evidence or any disputed question of facts are involved and it is in that background jurisdiction of Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been brought into action. It would be a farcical exercise in filing the election petition as it has to be decided by Vice Chancellor, who already had not taken any decision on the representation ibid and by the time it would be decided, the period of electoral members would be over.
5. General Council of Mahatma Gandhi University Student Union is constituted with total 262 members belonging to various students unions, the four in number, as detailed in paragraph 6 of the petition and going by the proportional representation system as per provisions of Section 43 of 1985 Act, the qualifying vote for each contestant would be 262/15+1=16. Each candidate who receive 16 votes would get elected and the priority votes of Students Federation of India would get exhausted after 9th candidate in view of the multiple ballot papers and rest of the seats would be open for minority students union to win.
6. The new ballot system would give preference of the majority, which will repeat with six, first preference goes to all voters, drowning the minority, thereby giving absolute electoral victory. The sole motive is to promote the majority vote now belonging to the Students Federation of India in the General Council of University Students Union.
7. Regarding the maintainability of
