The Punjab and Haryana high court (HC) on Monday said that students seeking admission into Panjab University (PU) will have to abide by the varsity’s decision of taking an undertaking from students over ‘permission before protests’, pending a decision in the court.
The HC bench of chief justice Sheel Nagu and justice Sanjiv Berry passed this order on the plea from a student leader, Archit Garg, challenging the legality and constitutionality of the university’s requirement for students to sign an affidavit allegedly restricting the right to protest, assemble and express dissent.
The controversy started last month when PU came out with admission guidelines for the academic session 2025-26. As per the clause, inserted in the Handbook of Information 2025, PU can debar students from exams or cancel their admission if the protest guidelines, which mandated prior approval for protests, was violated.
The undertaking was to apply to first-year students. This had sparked more protests on campus as political parties criticised the move. Subsequently, PU formed a committee to look into the matter. The committee has indicated that the conditions could be diluted.
While seeking a response from the university by September 4, the court orally remarked “..which right can be put on higher pedestal, right to form association or right to education? If right to protest or form association under Article 19 comes into conflict in the main function of university, you have to choose between your right to protest and right to education, participate in the classroom…both can’t go hand-in-hand when there is conflict.”
{{/usCountry}}While seeking a response from the university by September 4, the court orally remarked “..which right can be put on higher pedestal, right to form association or right to education? If right to protest or form association under Article 19 comes into conflict in the main function of university, you have to choose between your right to protest and right to education, participate in the classroom…both can’t go hand-in-hand when there is conflict.”
{{/usCountry}}During the hearing, senior advocate Akshay Bhan, appearing for the petitioner, had submitted that the condition was unjustified as there are no rules or procedures prescribed to cancel admission. The petition had also objected to the clause that the students will not allow any outsider or stranger in the protest, dharna or rallies in order to avoid any ugly scene or the campus. The visitors are not controlled by the students, if any former student leader comes to address a gathering, it would be unjustified to cancel the admission of a student organising the protest, Bhan further argued.
Varsity’s counsel Subhash Ahuja in his submissions had given instances where protests turned violent.
The bench also observed that in recent years, it has “become a big problem for universities and someone has to take strong action”.
“As an interim measure, it is directed that the affidavit/undertaking at page 212 of the present petition be filled up by all students including the petitioner. However, filling up of the affidavit/undertaking shall remain subject to the outcome of the petition,” the bench ordered while taking note of the fact that the last date to file an affidavit for new admissions was July 17.