KUNWAR ARIF ALI BEG ALIAS MAMU Vs. VICE CHANCELLOR ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY CHIEF ELECTION OFFICER ALIGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri M.D. Singh 'Shekhar' Advocate on behalf of the petitioners and Sri Shashi Nandan Senior Advocate assisted by Srimati Sunita Agarwal on behalf of respondents 1, 2, 3 and 4.

(2.) Petitioner No. 1, Kunwar Arif Ali Beg claims himself to be the student of M. Tech. III semester while petitioner No. 2, namely Faizan Khan, claims himself to be a student o B. Com. Final year in the Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh, with enrolment Nos. 48927 and CC-5208 respectively. The petitioners being the students of Aligarh Muslim University are also members of the Aligarh Muslim University Students Union. The Vice Chancellor of the Aligarh Muslim University in his capacity as Patron of Aligarh Muslim University Students Union, as per Statute 34 under Chapter XXI of the Ordinances Academic (Executive) approved the Aligarh Muslim University Students Union (Conduct of Election) Regulation, 2004 (hereinafter referred to as the election regulations) for conduct of the elections of the Students Union. By means of notification dated 05.09.2004 Professor Noor Mohammad, Department of Sociology, was appointed as the Chief Election Officer for conducting the elections of the officer bearers of the Students Union of the University for the academic year 2004-05. The petitioners contend that subsequent to the aforesaid notification nominations were invited for various posts of the Students Union. Petitioner No. 1 submitted his nomination as a candidate for the post of President while petitioner No. 2 submitted his nomination for the post of Honorary Secretary. On 20.09.2004 the list of valid candidates for the post of Secretary as well as the President of the Students Union was declared. In the said list so disclosed the name of the petitioners were not mentioned as a consequence there to nominations of the petitioners for the respective posts stood declared invalid.

(3.) The petitioners have challenged the aforesaid action of the respondents on the ground that (a) the Chief Election Officer, Professor Noor Mohammad, had issued a letter dated 22.09.2004 informing all the candidates that their demand for permitting all the candidates who have filed their nominations to contest the elections of the Students Union has been accepted by the Vice Chancellor. The said decision of the Chief Election Officer is final in view of Regulation 6 read with Regulation 9 and, therefore, the subsequent letter of the Chief Election Officer to the effect that the Patron Vice Chancellor has not accepted his request for permitting all the candidates to participate in the elections is wholly without jurisdiction; (b) the respondents have acted in a discriminatory manner while interpreting Clause 3 of the Election Regulations as amended under the Officer Memo dated 15.09.2004 inasmuch as in respect of similarly situate candidates who have been found guilty of indiscipline and gross misconduct, permission to contest the elections has been granted as their candidature has not been rejected, as has been done in the case of the case of the petitioners, as such the entire election stood vitiated on the ground of the discrimination practiced by the Vice Chancellor in permitting other disqualified candidates who were similarly punished for indiscipline and gross misconduct (to contest the election); and (c) the respondents misinterpreted the words 'has been expelled from the roll of the University' as contained in Clause 3 of the Regulations inasmuch as the same qualifies the case of gross misconduct only and has no application in respect of the students who have been punished for indiscipline only.