MUHAMMED MUHSIN Vs. UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Senior Advocates George Poonthottam and G. Sreekumar for petitioners and Advocate P.C. Sasidharan for Calicut University.

(2.) The prayers in these three writ petitions are similar and the grounds of challenge are substantially identical. The writ petitions are heard together and this Court is of the view that the consideration of pleadings and prayer in W.P.(C) No. 34279 of 2019 and the contentions raised by the Senior Counsel would be sufficient for disposing of all the three writ petitions.

(3.) The petitioners are students and also Elected University Union Councillors from their respective colleges where the petitioners are studying. The colleges in which the petitioners are studying are un-aided and affiliated to University of Calicut/1st respondent. The petitioners pray for writ of certiorari to quash Ext. P3 and declare Article V1(B)(v) of Constitution of the Calicut University Union (Ext. P3) as illegal and violative of Article 14 of Constitution of India. Petitioners pray for consequential relief of quashing Ext. P7 schedule issued by 1st respondent University for conducting Calicut University Union Election 2019-20.