Rajvindra Kaur v. Government Post Graduate College

I N THE HI GH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAI NI TAL

HON'BLE THE CHI EF JUSTI CE SRI G. NARENDAR AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTI CE SUBHASH UPADHYAY

SPECI AL APPEAL NO. 3 3 6 OF 2 0 2 5

1 6 TH OCTOBER, 2 0 2 5

Rajvindra Kaur

…… Appellant

Versus

Govt. Post Graduate College Sitarganj and others

…… Respondents

Counsel for the appellant : Mr. Vikas Bahuguna, learned counsel (through VC) with Mr. Ajay Joshi, learned counsel

Counsel for the respondents : Mr. P.C. Bisht, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State / respondent Nos. 1 and 2

: Ms. Mamta Bisht, learned counsel for the University / respondent No. 4

Th e Cou r t m ade t h e follow in g:

JUDGMENT: ( per Hon 'ble Th e Ch ief Ju st ice Sr i G. Nar en dar )

Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondent-University. 2)

We have perused the impugned order. The impugned order does not indicate, let alone alleges, that the petitioner / appellant belong to any recognized

political party. Neither the name of the party, nor the fact whether the party is a National party, or a State party, or a Regional party, is mentioned. Merely the fact that she is elected member and represents a Ward in a Village Panchayat cannot be a ground to deem that she belongs to a political party. In fact, local government at the panchayat level is formed on a non-political lines. 3)

It was incumbent upon the authorities to name the party to which the appellant is affiliated with, or is a member of. In the absence of such a finding the reliance on provision 7(1) of the Constitution of the Students' Union, in our considered opinion, is misplaced. 4)

In that view of the matter, we deem it appropriate to dispense with notice to the private respondent. The elections having been completed and the fifth respondent having elected unopposed, the validity of the election has to be considered in terms of Article 17 of the Students' Union Constitution which provides for an alternate remedy before the Grievance Redressal Cell, and in that view, the appeal is allowed in part. 5)

The order of the learned Single Judge is set aside. Liberty is granted to the appellant to approach the Grievance Redressal Cell, and if any such petition /

application is made within two weeks from today, the same shall not be rejected on the ground of delay etc. 6)

The appeal stands ordered accordingly. 7)

Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.

________________

G. NARENDAR, C.J.

_ _ _ __ _ _

SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J.

Dt: 16TH OCTOBER, 2025 Negi

HIMANS HU NEGI DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND,

2.5.4.20=bb3b60774012c1ef1dae20d13aaf1 16e73351fdaf6878326386908a7f90d5757, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=75BD9D0FB7F4A80990FC51A 722A6BC552D470EB4FD2F88DDF7C18DB2A 1524A4D, cn=HIMANSHU NEGI Date: 2025.10.17 16:47:36 +05'30'