University Elections - Non-fulfillment of minimum attendance requirement - Nomination rejected : Violation of Principles of Natural Justice
Court Intervenes in Rejection of Nomination Due to Attendance Discrepancy; Grievance Committee to Reassess Records
In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court has directed the Grievance Committee of Satyawati College, University of Delhi, to provide a personal hearing to Roop Bansal, a second-year B.Com. student, who challenged the rejection of his nomination for the post of President of the Students' Union. The rejection was based on the allegation that Bansal did not meet the mandated minimum attendance requirement of 75%, in accordance with the Lyngdoh Committee Guidelines and College Election Rules.
Presiding Judge, Ms. Mini Pushkarna, in her oral judgment dated September 16, 2025, emphasized the violation of Principles of Natural Justice, as the petitioner was denied a chance to present his case prior to the cancellation of his nomination. The Court noted discrepancies in Bansal’s attendance records across subjects like Hindi, English, and Accounts, which he claims were not accurately accounted for by the college.
The petitioner, represented by counsel Mr. Ashu Bidhuri, argued that despite submitting nomination papers on time, his application was rejected without a fair hearing. Counsel highlighted evidence from attendance registers and communications via official WhatsApp groups, where attendance was recorded and allegedly overlooked by the college administration.
The defense, representing Satyawati College and the Election Officer, maintained that Bansal's attendance stood at 65%, below the required threshold. However, the Court has now directed the Grievance Committee to reassess the petitioner’s attendance records with a fresh perspective.
The judgment stipulates that the Grievance Committee, comprising five Assistant Professors, will convene at 2:00 PM for a session where Bansal can present his case with supporting documents. Professors from the concerned subjects will also participate to ensure transparency in the verification process. The committee is tasked with recalculating the attendance in Bansal's presence and informing him of the findings during the hearing.
Should Bansal's attendance meet the 75% criterion, the Court has ordered his nomination to be accepted, allowing him to contest the election. Conversely, if the attendance falls short, the rejection will stand, though the petitioner will be duly notified.
This judicial intervention underscores the importance of adherence to procedural fairness in academic and electoral matters, particularly in institutions of higher learning. It serves as a reminder of the judiciary's role in safeguarding student rights and ensuring compliance with established guidelines.
With the decision, the Court has concluded the writ petition, setting a precedence for future disputes involving university election processes and student rights. The outcome of the hearing will determine Bansal's eligibility to campaign, potentially altering the dynamics of the upcoming student elections at Satyawati College.
Roop Bansal v. University of Delhi, (Delhi) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2779426
