THE CHAIRMAN of a three-member tribunal, formed to resolve the issue of Allahabad University Students Union (AUSU) president Ajit Yadav’s election, resigned suddenly on Wednesday. The move is believed to have been the result of political pressure being exerted on chairman Justice (retired) Achal Bihari Srivastava with an aim to influence the tribunal’s decision. The election was challeged by Raghunath Dwivedi .
The resignation, which came just a day before the tribunal was to give its final verdict, has created a fresh problem for the AU authorities.
Raghunath Dwivedi, who polled the second highest number of votes in the AUSU elections, had submitted a memorandum to the varsity administration, challenging the election of Ajit Yadav to the post of AUSU president.
He had cited some documents and claimed that Ajit was employed as a teacher at a government school. Dwivedi had claimed that Ajit had even been issued migration from the varsity and thus was ineligible to contest the polls.
Following the allegations, the AU Executive Council decided to form a three-member tribunal to decide on the issue. Former Justice Achal Bihari Srivastava was made the chairman and had KB Srivastava and Farhat Ali as the members.
Both the parties presented their arguments before the tribunal with the help of their lawyers.
{{/usCountry}}Both the parties presented their arguments before the tribunal with the help of their lawyers.
{{/usCountry}}The last hearing took place on March 24 and the decision was reserved. Later, it was said that the tribunal would give its verdict on March 30.
However, on March 29, just a day before the D-day, the chairman of the tribunal resigned from the post amidst reports of political pressure on him being the reason for the move.
The resignation has put the AU administration in a spot, as even after four months of the AUSU elections, the formation of the Board of Trustees (BoT) is still pending. The AU Executive Council has instructed the V-C to pen the BoT formation letter only after the issue of AUSU presidentship is resolved.
The resignation led to hectic rounds of consultation by the AU V-C Prof Rajen Harshe with top varsity officials and both the parties involved.
Experts said the vice-chancellor had four options open to him. First to convince Justice Achal Bihari Srivastava to take back his resignation letter, convince the remaining two members of the tribunal to give their decision, or convene an urgent meeting of the Executive Council to get their opinion.
The last and not so preferable option for the V-C is to approach the Visitor, bypassing the EC for his opinion—a move that can turn the entire panel of counsellors against the Vice-Chancellor.