Rajasthan High Court Issues Prospective Directions On Conducting Student Union Elections To Balance Democracy & Academic Discipline

The Rajasthan High Court recently refused to entertain pleas by students challenging inaction by State in conducting Student Union elections for 2025-26 for the State University, holding that the petitioners lacked locus standi and the pleas were filed at a pre-decisional stage in the absence of any demonstrable violation of legal or fundamental right.

Justice Sameer Jain said that even while declining relief, a constitutional court is not denuded of its power to issue appropriate obiter or prospective directions in aid of good governance, institutional accountability, and to obviate recurring litigation.

"Student democracy and academic autonomy are not adversaries; when guided by discipline, transparency, and reason, both coexist to strengthen the very foundation of education” the court underscored. 

However in light of the "larger public interest", academic ecosystem of universities and the need to balance student participation with academic discipline, following directions were issued to be operated prospectively and not in relation to this year's student elections.

Directions to Students

1. Any grievance relating to scheduling of student elections to be raised before competent university authorities. Direct recourse to courts to remain an exception and not a rule.
2. State to grant effective audience to the petitioner to put forth their grievances on January 19, 2026, to take reasoned and informed decision on the issues put forth during this meeting that should be formally recorded and notified.
3. Post this, an appropriate and workable modus operandi to be prepared for the conduct of student elections in forthcoming academic years, after due consultation with all students/representatives, within 15 days from thereon.

Directions to Universities and State

1. To ensure institutional accountability and transparency in relation to the fee collected from students under various heads, including that of elections.
2. Constituting and maintaining a Student Union Election Board/Committee to be accountable for decisions relating to student union elections.
3. Ensuring that such board afforded reasonable hearing to student representatives.

Prospective Conduct of Student Union Elections

While refraining to give an operative direction for this session's elections, considering advanced stage of the session, following directions were issued for future:

1. Election calendar to be ordinarily issued in March of each academic year, and shall be adhered to. Any departure from the same to be supported by cogent reasons recorded in writing.
2. Elections to be conducted within the timeframe contemplated under the governing stature and judicial precedents, except for in exceptional circumstances.
3. Mode and manner of elections (direct, indirect, hybrid) to be decided by Vice Chancellor or designated Election conducting authority/committee, in consonance with Rajasthan Universities Students' Union Elections Guidelines and Rules, 2017 (RUSU Guidelines).
4. Since Student Union Elections were purely student centric, it had to be ensured that there was no unwarranted political shopping/intervention/interference.
5. Existing restriction on candidature as prescribed under RUSU guidelines to be strictly enforced.

Academic Primacy and Use of University Campuses

During the conduct of student elections:

1. University campuses not to be used in a manner that hampers the academic process.
2. Teaching schedules, exams, research activities and access to libraries/labs to remain largely unaffected.
3. Primary objective of imparting education to not be compromised.
4. Election commissioner (university) or any other competent authority to be at the liberty to frame reasonable restrictions, regulations etc. for maintaining academic discipline.

It was argued by the Amicus Curiae as well as the counsel for the petitioners that the State was required to comply with the Lyngdoh Committee recommendation given in the Supreme Court case of University of Kerala v. Council, Principal Education, Kerala and ors requiring yearly conduct of student union elections, within 6-8 weeks from session's commencement.

It was further submitted that judicial view had been consistent about recognizing student union elections as not a peripheral activity but forming an integral part and inseparable part of education. Since right to form association and thus a student union was a fundamental right under Article 19, it necessarily included the right to elect representatives of such union.

In this background, it was argued that the State could not arbitrarily deviate from this practice and curb this fundamental right of students. It was further submitted that when the university had collected fee from students for holding election, it could not evade its obligations in this regard.

Highlighting non-conduct of elections even for last two preceding academic sessions, it was argued that such repeated non-conduct of elections was arbitrary, unconstitutional and violative of fundamental rights.

On the contrary, the counsel representing the State started by raising certain preliminary objection. Firstly, it was submitted that right to vote or participate in elections was only a statutory right and not a fundamental right. Hence, there was no violation of any fundamental right of the petitioners.

Further, it was argued that out of thousands of students in the Rajasthan University, only 5 students had approached the Court, which clearly demonstrated that the petitioners did not represent voice of majority of students.

The counsel also submitted that the petitions were filed without making any representations to the Dean, Student Welfare or without exhausting the alternative internal remedy. Hence, the petitions were pre-mature.

After hearing these contentions, the Court observed, “albeit student elections serve as a vital instrument for nurturing democratic values, leadership and civic responsibilities, along the young minds; however, such participatory processes must operate within well-defined parameters, ensuring that the pursuit of representative governance does not overshadow or undermine the paramount objective of educational institutions, namely, the uninterrupted advancement of academic discipline, excellence and institutional harmony.”

The court however found merit in the preliminary objections raised by the counsel for the State. It was held that a handful of students, without any representative authorization could not claim to represent the cause of lakhs of students across the State.

Further, it was stated that in the absence of any demand or representation being made internally, the petitions were pre-mature since the Court could not issue writs on hypothetical apprehensions. 

In this background, the petitions were disposed off.

Read more: 'Higher Education Campuses Not Fungible': Rajasthan High Court Issues Guidelines To ECI On Use Of Universities During Elections

Title: Jai Rao v State of Rajasthan and Other connected petitions

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Raj) 423

Click Here To Read/Download Order