Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Randeep Singh Choudahry vs University Of Raj And Anr on 24 August, 2016
Author: Alok Sharma
Bench: Alok Sharma
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.11547/2016
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.11547/2016
Randeep Singh Choudhary
vs.
University of Rajasthan & Anr.
Date of Order-::-24th August, 2016
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SHARMA
Mr. S.N. Kumawat, for petitioner.
Mr. A.K. Sharma Senior Counsel assisted by
Mr. V.K. Sharma, for respondents.
By the Court:-
Under challenge is the communication dated 22.08.2016 passed by the Dean Student Welfare, University of Rajasthan, whereby the petitioner has been held to be not qualified to contest the RUSU Elections for the year 2016 in view of Clause 20 (c) of the Constitution of the Rajasthan University Students' Union (hereinafter 'the Constitution of RUSU').
Mr. S.N. Kumawat appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner took admission in M.A. (Public Admn.) in July 2014. In Part I of the said two year course, the petitioner passed the First Semester but failed to appear in Second Semester S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.11547/2016 -2- for reasons beyond to his control. Yet in terms of obtaining University of Rajasthan Ordinances, he was allowed to be admitted to Part II of M.A. (Public Admn.) in July 2015. The petitioner then passed the Third Semester in December 2015 and the Fourth Semester in May 2016. The petitioner has since taken admission into M.A. (Anthropology) in July 2016. He now seeks to contest the elections to one of the posts in the RUSU election to which are to be held on 31.08.2016 for which process was initiated vide notification dated 22.08.2016. Attention of this Court has been drawn to Clause 20 (c) of the Constitution of RUSU, which reads as under:-
"20. No member of the Rajasthan University Students' Union/other Unions shall be entitled to contest for any post of office-bearer or to become student member of the Assembly/executive council/executive Committee as the case may be, if that student:-
(c) has failed to clear all the papers of the class in which he has taken admission in the preceding academic session of the year of contesting the election (whether Annual or Semester Scheme) individually and in aggregate, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.11547/2016 -3- including by absence in the said examination."
Mr. S.N. Kumwat has submitted that albeit the petitioner has back papers relating to the Second Semester of Part-I of the M.A. (Public Admn.) relating to the Academic Year 2014-15, in respect of the Academic Year 2015-16 he has passed all the papers in the third and fourth semester. Counsel submitted that the petitioner thus does not have any back papers in respect of the preceding Academic Year i.e. 2015-16 and on this count on the language of Clause 20 (c) of the Constitution of RUSU, he could not have been disqualified from contesting the elections to RUSU to be held on 31.08.2016. Mr. Kumawat submitted that in terms of the Rajasthan University Ordinances particularly Ordinance 199F5
(e), the petitioner as student of M.A. (Public Admn.) can pass the M.A. Examination within a period of 5 years from the year of his admission. Consequently, it was not incumbent upon the petitioner to pass all due papers in the Second Semester relating to M.A. (Public Admn.) Part I in the academic session 2015- 16 itself. Mr. Kumawat further submitted that provisions in the Constitution of RUSU with regard to S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.11547/2016 -4- the eligibility to contest the elections for RUSU should be strictly construed and even in the event of an ambiguity therein it should be resolved by way of interpretation which advances the democratic ethos and allows maximum participation of the student in the process for election of office bearers of RUSU.
Mr. A.K. Sharma Senior Counsel appearing with Mr. V.K. Sharma for the respondent-University also drawing attention of this Court to Clause 20 (c) of the Constitution of RUSU, has submitted that holistically and purposively construed, the said Clause makes it very clear that a student seeking to contest the elections to any post in RUSU must have necessarily cleared all the papers of the class to which he was admitted prior to being eligible to contest elections to any post in RUSU. Mr. A.K. Sharma submitted that Clause 20 (c) makes it very clear that to be eligible the student should have passed individually and in the aggregate all papers relating to the class in which he was admitted in the RUSU. It was submitted that the words "all the papers of the class in which he has taken admission"
in clause 20 (c) of the Constitution of RUSU leave no room for doubt that the petitioner who had taken S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.11547/2016 -5- admission in M.A. (Public Admn.) and failed to clear all the papers in the aggregate relating to the said class (Semesters 1 and 2 (Part I) and 3 and 4 (Part II), was not eligible to contest the elections. It was submitted that Clause 20 (c) has been incorporated in the Constitution vide notification dated 08.08.2016 with the intent of preventing the conversion of the University from a home for academics to one for politics and facilitate election of students who are not serious with regard to the discharge of their primary obligations to study, as reflected from their unacceptable academic performance and failure to clear all papers of the class in issue in the aggregate. Mr. A.K. Sharma also pointed out that in the case of the petitioner what exacerbates the issue is the fact that the petitioner on his own say has taken admission in the M.A. (Public Admn.) in Academic Year 2016-17 thus evidencing that he has abandoned M.A. (Public Admn.) Course to which he was earlier admitted in 2014-15. It was submitted that the University of Rajasthan Ordinances do not contemplate a student being simultaneously admitted into two courses in the University. Mr. A.K. Sharma further submitted S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.11547/2016 -6- that a challenge to the Clause 20 (c) of the Constitution of RUSU was made in Civil Writ Petition No.11262/2016 (Ramniwas vs. The University of Rajasthan & Anr.) and another connected matter whereon the Division Bench of this Court vide interim order dated 17.08.2016 refused to both stay operation of the Clause 20 (c) of the Constitution of RUSU or grant any interim relief to the petitioners before it despite a specific prayer being made in the Stay Application No.10111/2016 in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.11262/2016 (Ramniwas vs. The University of Rajasthan & Anr.) that "alternatively the petitioner be allowed to participate in the election process and his nomination may not be rejected having incurred disqualification enumerated under Clause 20 (c) of the Constitution of 2010". Mr. A.K. Sharma submitted that no interim order having been passed by the Division Bench in an identical matter, there is no occasion for this Court to take a different view in disregard to the principle of parity and comity of Courts. It was then submitted that an error having been detected in the order dated 22.08.2016 holding the petitioner not qualified to contest the RUSU elections in the year 2016, a S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.11547/2016 -7- corrigendum was issued on 23.08.2016 seeking to hold the petitioner disqualified also on the ground that the petitioner had taken admission in a new course in the current academic session without passing the old course. Mr. A.K. Sharma also submitted that a consistent interpretation of the Clause 20 (c) of the Constitution of RUSU has been taken by the University without any discrimination and consequently the allegations of malafide in holding the petitioner disqualified are baseless and without merit. It was further submitted that Ordinance 199F5(e) has no relevance in the issue at hand as the said provision relates to grant of a degree for the purpose of which a period of five years is allowed to the student admitted in the Public Administration to secure the requisite 120 credits to be eligible for a M.A. (Public Admn.) degree. The issue before this Court is with regard to the eligibility of a student to contest the elections to RUSU.
Heard. Considered.
Clause 20 (c) of the Constitution of RUSU makes failure to clear all papers individually and in aggregate in the class to which a student has been S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.11547/2016 -8- admitted as an ineligibility event for contesting RUSU elections. In the instant case, it is an admitted fact that the petitioner having been admitted in M.A. (Public Admn.) in the academic session 2014-15 despite having passed the First Semester of Part-I of the said course failed to appear in Second Semester of Part-I of M.A. (Public Admn.) and hence failed it. Thereafter the petitioner was admitted to M.A. (Public Admn.) Part II and has since passed the Third and Fourth Semester Examination. It is no doubt true that Ordinance 199F5(e) of the University of Rajasthan Ordinances allow a student of M.A. (Public Admn.), five years to pass the course, secure 120 credits and obtain a degree in M.A. (Public Admn.). That is however besides the point, as the issue before this Court is not with regard to the petitioner's right to secure a M.A. (Public Admn.) degree but is with regard to the petitioner's eligibility to contest the RUSU elections 2016. That has to be determined strictly with reference to 20 (c) of the Constitution of RUSU. The language of Clause 20 (c) reproduced hereinabove indicates that for being eligible to contest the RUSU election a student should have cleared "all the papers in the class in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.11547/2016 -9- which he has taken admission". This admittedly the petitioner has not done. Mr. Kumawat has however relied upon the following words i.e. "in the preceding academic session of the year" to contend that the petitioner having cleared all the papers (semesters 3 and 4 )in the preceding Academic Year 2015-16 when he was admitted into M.A. (Public Admn.) Part II the petitioner is eligible. I am however of the considered view that the contention of Mr. Kumawat is not tenable. The opening words in Clause 20 (c) "all the papers in the class in which he has taken admission" cannot be negated or even diluted by the following phrase which appears to have not been happily worded. The clear intent of Clause 20 (c) of the Constitution of RUSU is that a student seeking to contest elections to various posts in RUSU must have a minimum academic attainment reflected in his having passed all the papers in the aggregate of the class to which he was admitted i.e. he should not have any back papers at the time he seeks to contest the election. It is inconceivable that the intent and purport of Clause 20 (c) of the Constitution of RUSU was to allow a student with back papers in the class to which he was admitted to S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.11547/2016 -10- contest the elections merely because in the immediately preceding year he had passed all the papers relevant to that Academic Year--overlooking the fact that in previous preceding Academic Year which was a part of the course to which he was admitted, he had failed to do so. The words "academic session" (singular) in Clause 20 (c) of the Constitution of RUSU have to be construed as "academic sessions" (in the plural) with reference to Section 14 (2) of the Rajasthan General Clauses Act 1955 which provides that:-
"14. Gender and number-In all Rajasthan laws, unless a different intention appears- (2) words in the singular shall include the plural and vice versa."
Hence under Clause 20 (c) of the Constitution of RUSU to be eligible to contest RUSU elections, a student has to mandatorily have cleared all the papers of the academic sessions of the class to which he was admitted.
Aside of the aforesaid, it is also an admitted fact that the petitioner has since taken an admission to M.A. (Anthropology) with the respondent University in the academic session 2016-17. There is nothing on record for this Court to negate the very S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.11547/2016 -11- plausible contention of the senior counsel for the respondent-University that a student cannot be admitted into two course simultaneously in the University of Rajasthan. And hence having been admitted into M.A. (Anthropology) in the academic session 2016-17, the petitioner has impliedly abandoned M.A. (Public Admn.) to which he was admitted in the Academic Year 2014-15. This fact makes the petitioner's failure to clear all papers of MA (Public Admn.) to which he admitted permanent. Further a specific prayer made before the Division Bench in Civil Writ Petition No.11262/2016 (Ramniwas versus University of Rajasthan & Anr.) that in the interim despite Clause 20 (c) of the Constitution of RUSU, the petitioner therein be allowed to participate in the election to RUSU to be held on 31.08.2016. That prayer was declined. There is no reason for this Court to take a different view for reason of parity and comity of Courts.
It is no doubt true that in the corrigendum dated 23.08.2016, the Dean Student Welfare has wrongly recorded that the petitioner "had taken admission in a new course without passing the old course", but that by itself would not entitle the S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.11547/2016 -12- petitioner to contest the elections to a post in RUSU for reasons of his otherwise being ineligible for the RUSU elections 2016 for reasons detailed hereinabove.
Consequently, I find no force in the petition. Dismissed.
(ALOK SHARMA), J.
R.Vaishnav, Satyam, Himanshu Soni.