E-Paper
PU moves high court seeking stay on judgment over senate polls
Appeal was taken up by the bench of Justice Ritu Bahri on Thursday wherein appearing for the varsity additional solicitor general Satya Pal Jain told the court that on April 16, poll schedule was announced for April 26
Panjab University (PU) has approached the high court challenging the judgment which had in March asked the varsity to hold polls within two months.
The appeal was taken up by the bench of Justice Ritu Bahri on Thursday wherein appearing for the varsity additional solicitor general Satya Pal Jain told the court that on April 16, poll schedule was announced for April 26.
Thereafter, this notification was revised and election was rescheduled for May 19. However, Punjab government had put in place restrictions due to Covid-19 situation in which there was a strict provision that not more than 20 people be allowed in any event. A total of 3,75,500 voters are there which are spread across six states and keeping in view the present situation, it is not possible to hold the election, the court was told.
Appearing for respondents, senior advocate RS Cheema, too, did not dispute the facts presented by the varsity on Covid situation. The court adjourned the matter till July 8 stating that situation would be reassessed on the adjourned date.
It was on March 23 that the high court had criticised the role of PU vice-chancellor Raj Kumar and a single judge bench had directed the university to hold senate polls within two months. The high court order came on the plea of seven former senators, who had moved court on December 22, seeking directions to hold governing body polls.
The term of the senate, the apex governing body of PU, had ended on October 31, 2020. Elections were to take place in August 2020, but varsity deferred it citing Covid-19 as the reason for the same. The single judge bench had observed that provisions on governance have been “thrown off to the winds” and university was being run as a “one-man show”.
PU in this appeal says the March 23 judgment was not only contrary to facts but also contrary to three division bench judgments of high court wherein decisions on various steps taken in view of pandemic were upheld by the court in the matters of admissions and others. The court was also told that the directions are untenable because the varsity is bound to follow restrictions/prohibitions imposed by the respective states during the pandemic.
There is no evidence in entire writ petition as to how a particular person has been unduly benefitted or prejudiced by the varsity decision of deferring polls, the university says, further stating that findings against the vice-chancellor that he appeared to have acted on political considerations are unwarranted.
