The writ petition seeking direction to Osmania University (OU) to accord permission to Congress leader Rahul Gandhi to participate in face-to-face interaction with the students of the varsity was dismissed by Justice B Vijaysen Reddy of Telangana High Court on Wednesday, May 4.
The petition was filed by PhD scholar K Manavatha Roy as well as three other students while OU was represented by its Vice-Chancellor and Registrar. The interaction was going to be held at the Tagore Auditorium on the OU campus.
It was made clear by the court that the campus cannot be used as a political platform. Even though it was stated by the petitioner that in earlier instances, certain political events were held on campus, including BJP's mock assembly, the celebration of Chief Minister K Chandrashekar Rao's birthday and the birthday celebrations of George Reddy, the same cannot be a ground to permit political events in violation of resolution passed by the Executive Council of the University, it said.
"Article 14 of the Constitution guarantees positive equality and not negative equality. Merely because the respondents are stated to have permitted other activities, this court cannot permit the proposed meeting in violation of its executive council resolution," it added.
It was the opinion of the court that the Registrar, who is responsible for all the university's administrative affairs, is the right authority to make decisions on which activities can and cannot be held on campus.
"It is not for this court to interfere with the decision of the Vice-Chancellor unless the same is tainted with mala fides occasions or contrary to the provisions of law. The universities have to be exclusively designated as centres for imparting knowledge, training etc, and outsiders should not be permitted to enter the university. Any lapse on the part of the university, like permitting birthday celebrations of politicians, student leaders, would give the impression of bias and selective discrimination. Vice-Chancellor is cautioned not to allow any such activities in future, except for exclusive academic-related activities," the court said.
The court also shared that the university shall explore the possibilities of coming up with detailed and coherent guidelines for banning any meetings, political activities/events on the campus in future, which, in the considered opinion of the court, are vital for safeguarding and promoting the interests of the entire student community.
The universities also need to ensure that while pursuing their education, students maintain distance from politics as they need to focus on their careers. This court hopes that similar guidelines/regulations are framed by other universities to ensure that political events are not conducted on university campuses hereinafter, the court said.
It was the contention of the petitioners to declare the action of the VC, OU in issuing the impugned order refusing to give permission for conducting face-to-face interaction with the students and the unemployed in Tagore Auditorium with Rahul Gandhi on irrelevant grounds, as being illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, unilateral, unjust and unconstitutional and consequently quash the order and to grant permission to accord meeting.
The counsel for OU submitted that the first petitioner is the Indian National Congress' spokesperson as well as the National Students Union of India (NSUI) member. The writ petition is not maintainable because the Executive Council of the university's resolution is not challenged.
They went on to say that there is a hidden agenda in conducting the so-called face-to-face interactive session with Rahul Gandhi. The details of unemployed youth are not given. No details of the number of youth who would participate are given. If permission is granted, there is every scope for mass gathering and eventually, it may lead to the breakdown of law and order. The elections, which are being held on the campus on May 7, 2022, are internal elections and no outsiders are permitted. A prior notification was issued on April 23, 2022, announcing elections to be held on the said date. There are no merits in the writ petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.
After listening to the contentions of both sides, the high court dismissed the writ petition.
