“Jawaharlal Nehru University is permitted to notify the result in accordance with the recommendation of Lyngdoh Committee”, said Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva while disposing of the writ petitions of two students alleging that their nominations for polls were illegally rejected for elections of councillor in JNUSU.

Court in connected matters of Anshuman Dubey v JNU and Anuj Kumar Dwivedi v JNU devised that the allegation is two fold

⁃          Seats are reduced from 55 to 46

⁃          Petitioner is debarred from the election

JNU’s counsel, Miss Monika Arora rebutted the first contention saying, “it’s incorrect that seats reduced from 55 to 46. Last year there were even less seats.”

Justice Sachdeva, addressing petitioner counsel Barun Kumar Sinha, said – “you made incorrect statement… whether there were 65 seats or 45 seats it’s not the issue you have made an incorrect statement on which I had passed the interim order.” The first ground was thus rejected.

On petitioner’s request for a Passover, Court said the matter can be disposed of today itself.

Court accepted JNU’s contention that candidature was rejected owing to duplication of forms, which is a violation and valid reason for cancellation.

Bench inquired, “Does the constitution say they have to accept the nomination even if it’s wrongly filled? You accept this rule and fill up a nomination but it was wrongly filled.”

Court thus directed JNU to notify the result of elections, the same being subject to Lyngdoh committee recommendations.

Court held that appropriate forum to raise any grievance of the candidates is the Grievance Redressal Committee (GRC), not the High Court – “If GRC holds that there will be election for 9 more seats then there will be an election. Who has to decide what has not been followed? It’s GRC. I cannot set aside the whole election. If GRC comes to a conclusion that whole election have to go then it will go. Nothing more.”

Court said, “The whole election cannot be set aside just because your school does not have an election.”

Since the student constitution says every school will have a councillor, Court also inquired, “In case less posts filled up then more can be done by way of election. What will be the electoral college for this school? Why Supplementary elections cannot be hold for school?..  Assuming in a petition, court set aside the election, can a Fresh election be held?” JNU replied in the negative.

Thus the Bench said- I am leaving it open for the GRC in terms of the recommendation of the Lyngdoh committee if there is wrong then take action. Conduct an inquiry. If they have not followed the Lyngdoh committee recommendation then you must take action. I am leaving everything open to make a complaint before the GRC in accordance with the recommendation of the Lyngdoh Committee. It is upon GRC to act on the complaint.

Court also noted that a petition could have been allowed if it was filed before the election at the stage of nomination.

JNU filed an affidavit stating the polling was complete and the result was kept in a sealed cover.

Court thus allowed JNU to notify the student union election results in accordance with the recommendation of the Lyngdoh committee and also subjected it to the order passed by the GRC.

–India Legal Bureau