Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Gujarat High Court

Patel Maulik Rajeshbhai vs Gujarat University & on 10 March, 2017

Author: Bela M. Trivedi

Bench: Bela M. Trivedi

                 C/SCA/5086/2017                                          ORDER



                IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                   SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION  NO. 5086 of 2017
         ========================================================
                     PATEL MAULIK RAJESHBHAI....Petitioner(s)
                                        Versus
                     GUJARAT UNIVERSITY  &  1....Respondent(s)
         ========================================================
         Appearance:
         MR SUDHANSHU JHA, ADVOCATE with MR. NISARG D SHAH, 
         ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
         MR UTKARSH SHARMA, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 2
         SENIOR ADVOCATE MR. S.N. SHELAT with MRS VD NANAVATI, 
         ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 1
         ========================================================

          CORAM: HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE BELA M. TRIVEDI
                             Date : 10/03/2017
          ORAL ORDER

1. The petitioner by way of present petition sought  direction   against   Respondent   No.1   to   continue  with the scheduled election process and to quash  and   set   aside   the   circular   dated   06.03.2017,  postponing   the   election   of   the   ten  representatives of students on the court for the  year 2016­17.

2. The   petitioner,   who   is   pursuing   B.sc.   in   M.G.  Science College of the Respondent No.1 University  has sought to challenge the said circular dated  06.03.2017   alleging,   inter   alia,   that   the  election   for   the   said   constituency   was   already  declared   by   issuing   the   advertisement   on  22.02.2017 (Annexure­B), according to which last  date   for   accepting   the   nomination   form   was  09.03.2017 and the date of election was fixed on  26.03.2017.   However,   the   in­charge   Vice  Page 1 of 5 HC-NIC Page 1 of 5 Created On Mon Aug 14 07:09:57 IST 2017 C/SCA/5086/2017 ORDER Chancellor   without   any   authority   had   issued   the  impugned circular postponing the election without  any justifiable reasons.

3. The   main   contention   raised   by   learned   Advocate  Mr.Sudhanshu Jha with learned Advocate Mr.Nisarg  D. Shah for the petitioner is that the election  having been declared by the Respondent No.1 for  the said constituency could not have been stayed  by   the   in­charge   Vice   Chancellor   on   the   vague  grounds that there were serious issues raised by  the   students   with   regard   to   the   reservation  policy.   According   to   him,   earlier   also   election  for   the   said   constituency   was   declared   and  postponed   by   the   Vice   Chancellor   without   any  justifiable   reasons,   and   now   when   the   academic  year   is   going   to   end   on   10.04.2017,   again   the  election   is   being   stayed   without   any  justification. He placed reliance on the various  provisions   contained   in   the   Gujarat   University  Act   and   the   Statues   to   submit   that   Vice  Chancellor had the authority to fix the date of  election   but   had   no   authority   to   stay   election  once declared. 

4. However,   learned   Senior   Counsel   Mr.S.N.Shelat  appearing   for   the   Respondent   No.1­University  placing reliance on the affidavit in reply filed  by it, submitted that it was within the power of  the   Vice   Chancellor   to   fix   or   postpone   the  election considering the circumstances prevailing  Page 2 of 5 HC-NIC Page 2 of 5 Created On Mon Aug 14 07:09:57 IST 2017 C/SCA/5086/2017 ORDER in   the   university.   Placing   reliance   on   the  decision of the Allahabad High Court in the case  of Ravi Kiran Jain Vs. Bar Council of U.P. Thrg.  Secretary reported in AIR 1974 Allahabad 211 and  pressing into service Section 21 of the General  Clauses Act (10 of 1897), he submitted that power  to   issue   notification   or   orders   would   also  include   the   power   to   alter/   modify   the   very  notification   and/or   orders.   He   also   relied   upon  several   representations   received   by   the   Vice  Chancellor   with   regard   to   the   grievances   raised  by the students to provide reservation policy for  SCST   students,   and   submitted   that   the   Vice  Chancellor   apprehending   agitation   in   the  university   with   regard   to   the   said   issues,   had  thought it appropriate to postpone the election. 

5. In   the   instant   case,   it   appears   that   the  Respondent   No.1   had   issued   the   tentative  programme of the election for the constituency of  10 representatives of the students on the Court  for   the   year   2016­17(Annexure­C).   However,   the  same was stayed by the in­charge Vice Chancellor  vide   the   circular   dated   06.03.2017   (Annexure­A)  on   the   ground   that   there   were   many  complaints/serious   issues   raised   on   the  implementation   of   the   reservation   policy   and  therefore, it was in the larger interest of the  students to stay election. So far as the powers  of   Vice   Chancellor   are   concerned,   as   rightly  submitted   by   learned   Senior   Counsel   Mr.Shelat,  Page 3 of 5 HC-NIC Page 3 of 5 Created On Mon Aug 14 07:09:57 IST 2017 C/SCA/5086/2017 ORDER Statute 14(C) of the Statutes contained Part II  of   the   Handbook   of   the   Gujarat   University,  provides   for   the   manner   and   procedure   for   the  election of the students' representatives on the  Court, and also empowers the Vice Chancellor to  fix   the   date   of   election   of   students'  representatives.   Statute   14­C   (3)   provides   that  notwithstanding   anything   contained   elsewhere   it  shall   be   competent   for   the   Vice   Chancellor   to  make   such   suitable   modifications   in   the   time  schedule   for   the   various   processes   in   the  election   as   he   deems   necessary   in   the  circumstances   so   require.   In   view   of   the   said  provision   contained   in   the   said   statute,   the  Court   does   not   find   any   substance   in   the  submission   of   learned   Advocate   Mr.Jha   for   the  petitioner that the Vice Chancellor did not have  the   power   to   stay   or   postpone   the   election   in  question.

6. It   also   transpires   from   the   affidavit   in   reply  filed   by   the   Respondent   no.1   that   the   Vice  Chancellor had received the representations from  various groups agitating about non­implementation  of   the   reservation   policy   in   the   matter   of  election.   The   Vice   Chancellor   therefore  apprehended that the campus was not conducive to  hold the election as scheduled and that peace and  tranquility at the campus would not be maintained  because of commotion by the students. As stated  in   the   affidavit,   in   those   circumstances   Vice  Page 4 of 5 HC-NIC Page 4 of 5 Created On Mon Aug 14 07:09:57 IST 2017 C/SCA/5086/2017 ORDER Chancellor   had   taken   bonafide   decision   to  postpone   the   election.   Under   the   circumstances,  it   could   not   be   said   that   action   of   the  respondent   in   postponing   the   election   was  arbitrary or without any reason. It is true that  earlier   also   the   election   for   the   said  constituency was postponed and for the whole year  there was no representative from the students in  the   University   Court.   However,   considering   the  apprehension   expressed   by   the   Vice   Chancellor  that   the   atmosphere   of   the   campus   was   not  suitable   to   hold   election,   the   Court   is   not  inclined to interfere with the said decision of  the Vice Chancellor. 

7. Even   otherwise,   no   fruitful   purpose   would   be  served   in   holding   the   said   election   as   the  academic  year   2016­17     would  come  to  an  end  on  10.04.2017.   However,   it   is   expected   that  Respondent University shall hold the election of  the   said   constituency   for   the   next   year   at   the  earliest after the new academic year commences so  that   there   would   be   effective   participation   of  the students in the University Court.

8. Subject to the said observation, the petition  is  dismissed. Notice is discharged. 

   

(BELA M. TRIVEDI, J.)  Tuvar Page 5 of 5 HC-NIC Page 5 of 5 Created On Mon Aug 14 07:09:57 IST 2017