Rajasthan High Court
Mahendra Degra Son Of Shri Chotu ... vs State Of Rajasthan on 18 August, 2022
Bench: Mahendar Kumar Goyal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11941/2022
Nilesh Singh Sigger S/o Sh. Ram Singh
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan and Ors.
----Respondents
Connected With
2. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12088/2022
3. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11717/2022
4. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11723/2022
5. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11890/2022
6. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11905/2022
7. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11694/2022
8. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12242/2022
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. David Mehla,
Mr. R.C. Goutam with
Mr. Rohit Goutam &
Mr. Hari Charan Goutam,
Mr. Arafat Hussain with
Ms. Jamilo Bano,
Mr. Dinesh Kumar Garg,
Mr. Abhishek Sharma and
Mr. Gautam Bhadadra with
Mr. Devendra Saini
For Respondent(s) : Mr. A.K. Sharma, Senior Advocate
with Mr. Rachit Sharma and
Dr. V.B. Sharma, AAG with
Mr. Prakhar Gupta,
Mr. Avinash Choudhary,
Mr. Ankit Rathore &
Mr. Tushar Pareek
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL
Order
18/08/2022
Since, common question of law and fact is involved in all
these matters, they are hereby tagged and heard together.
Shri A.K. Sharma, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the
respondent-University/caveator and Dr. V.B. Sharma, learned
(2 of 3) [CW-11941/2022]
Additional Advocate General appearing for the respondent-
State/caveator prays for two weeks' time to file reply.
Learned counsels for the petitioners have no objection to the
aforesaid prayer; but, prays for an interim relief.
Learned counsels for the petitioners, relying upon a
judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court of India in case of High Court of
Delhi vs. Devina Sharma: (2022) 4 SCC 643, submitted that
the petitioners are entitled for relaxation qua age criteria as no
election in the students union could be held for last two years in
the wake of Covid-19 pandemic situation. He, therefore, prays
that as an interim measure, the respondents may be directed to
permit the petitioners to contest the students' election granting
them age relaxation.
Opposing the prayer, learned counsels for the respondents
submitted that the judgment in case of High Court of Delhi
(supra) cannot be applied in the present case inasmuch as it
pertains to participation in the recruitment examination; whereas,
present case pertains to the students' union election. They
submitted that the election process has already started vide
notification dated 17.08.2022 and this Court cannot interfere in
the ongoing election process after its issuance. Learned Senior
Counsel for the respondent-University submits that a Division
Bench of this Court has, vide its order dated 15.09.2022 passed in
DB Civil Writ Petition No.8727/2014: Subhash Chandra
Sharma vs. University of Raj. & Ors. dealing with identical
situation wherein, challenge was made to the Rule 17(c) of the
Constitution of Rajasthan University Student Union, 2010
prescribing maximum age for contesting the elections of the
(3 of 3) [CW-11941/2022]
students' union for Post-Graduate students, held that the aforesaid
Rule was neither ultra virus of the Act, nor, violative of
fundamental rights granted under the Constitution of India. It was
held that the provision of maximum age in the elections of
students' union serves the purpose of confining only bonafide
students to contest the elections and it was further held that the
maximum age of 25 years for the Post-Graduate students to
contest the elections was neither arbitrary nor unreasonable. He
further submits that wherein very recently, i.e., on 17.08.2022,
another Division Bench of this Court has, in DB Civil Writ
Petition No.11845/2022: Lokendra Singh vs. State of
Rajasthan and Ors. involving identical controversy, declined the
prayer for interim relief of grant of age relaxation. Learned Senior
Counsel submits that in the instant case, even validity of the Rule
prescribing maximum age for contesting the students union
election is not under challenge. Learned counsels, therefore,
prayed for rejection of the interim prayer.
Heard. Considered.
Taking into consideration the contentions advanced by the
learned counsels for the respective parties and the material on
record, this Court does not deem it just and proper to permit the
petitioners to contest the student union election granting them
age relaxation.
List on 06.09.2022 as prayed.
(MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J
MADAN/S-293, 202, 283-286 & 290
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
