Chandigarh: In a democratic system, elections need to be held periodically, which in turn leads to democratic governance and thus is a very essential function in decision making. This was stated by the Punjab and Haryana high court while directing Panjab University to complete the senate poll process within two months.
The directions were issued by Justice Fateh Deep Singh in an order of March 23, the detailed copy of which was made available on Thursday. The HC order said, “It (election) leads to accountability and raising of conscious level, resulting in better and efficient running and governance of an institution. The purpose of elections…ensures that the main administration of the university is vested with the senate which looks after each and every functioning of it.” It said putting elections on hold was in utter violation of the Act and the Regulations governing the respondent university and therefore unconstitutional.
“The respondent is directed to ensure that the electoral process is completed within two months of the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petition stands disposed of as allowed accordingly,” the order said. The petition was filed by Keshav Malhotra and six others. The former senators wanted the quashing of the August 15, 2020, orders of the V-C to defer the elections indefinitely.
An appeal was also made to set aside the October 16, 2020, communication of the UT administration, asking PU to defer the elections. Recently, UT had communicated to PU authorities that it should take a decision to conduct senate polls on its own.
The petitioners had alleged that certain candidates had pressurised the university administration and their political bosses to defer the elections. They then started another agenda for replacing the senate with a committee comprising representatives of the ruling political party who would be nominated by the office of the chancellor, also the Vice-President of India, through the home affairs ministry, it was alleged.
According to the petition, the V-C did not have jurisdiction to defer the elections and should have brought the matter before the syndicate.