[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Uttarakhand High Court
Unknown vs Government Post Graduate College on 4 December, 2025
2025:UHC:10785-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI G. NARENDAR
AND
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHASH UPADHYAY
Writ Petition (M/B) No.1012 of 2025
4th December , 2025
Rajvindra Kaur ----Petitioner
versus
Government Post Graduate College
and Others ----Respondents
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Presence:-
Mr. Yash Bisht, learned counsel for the petitioner
Mr. Sachin Mohan Singh Mehta, learned Standing Counsel for the State
Mrs. Pushpa Bisht, learned counsel for respondent no.4
Mr. Aditya Pratap Singh, learned counsel for respondent no.5
-------------------------------------------------------------------
JUDGMENT:
(per Sri G. Narendar, C. J.)
Heard Shri Yash Bisht, learned counsel for the
petitioner; Shri Sachin Mohan Singh Mehta, the learned
Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand; Smt.
Mamta Bisht, the learned counsel for the respondent
no.4 and Shri Aditya Pratap Singh, the learned counsel
for respondent no.5. Dr. M.S. Mandrawal, Registrar,
Kumaon University and Smt. Renul Bansal, Principal,
Government Post Graduate College are also present.
2. The instant petition has a history, whereby the
instant petitioner had approached this Court on being
2025:UHC:10785-DB
prevented from participating in the students' elections
on the ground that she had failed to disclose that she
was elected a member of the Gram Panchayat, Sisona.
3. This Court, after hearing, had permitted the
petitioner to approach the Grievance Redressal Cell
established by the University for the purposes of the
election. Pursuant to the liberty, the petitioner
approached the Grievance Redressal Cell and the
Grievance Redressal Cell has ruled in favour of the
petitioner, by holding that the rejection was improper.
Pursuant to the proceedings of the Grievance Redressal
Cell, the Principal had directed re-polling, which was
opposed by the Chief Election Officer, who is an
Associate Professor of the College. In this background,
the petitioner has once again approached this Court.
4. We have perused the nomination form. The
nomination form nowhere mandates disclosure of
participation in the election except elections as
contained in the Lyngdoh Committee report.
5. That apart, this Court had already taken a
view that the elections to the Gram Panchayat are not
fought on party basis and the contestants are called
2025:UHC:10785-DB
upon to participate in their individual capacities and not
back by any party. In that view, the present stalemate,
in our considered opinion is unsustainable.
6. The private respondents had vehemently
opposed the maintainability of the writ petition on the
ground of availability of alternate remedy in the form of
the Grievance Redressal Cell. The Grievance Redressal
Cell having given their verdict, it was incumbent on the
Chief Election Officer and the Principal to abide by the
same. The stand of the Chief Election Officer that she
would not accept the ruling of the Grievance Redressal
Cell is wholly unreasonable and beyond the scope and
jurisdiction of her role as an Election Officer.
7. The role of the Chief Election Officer is to
conduct elections in a peaceful manner and not create a
situation which may agitate the students. In that view,
we are of the opinion that the framing of the Grievance
Redressal cell is required to be implemented in letter
and spirit.
8. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed in
part. The Chief Election Officer is directed to conduct the
re-polling on 07.02.2026. The re-polling date is fixed for
2025:UHC:10785-DB
07.02.2026 in view of the fact that exams have
commenced from 02.12.2025 and are expected to
continue till 15.01.2026.
9. Writ petition stands ordered, accordingly.
(G. NARENDAR, C.J.)
(SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J.)
Dated: 04.12.2025
Rajni
