ORDER : 1. Heard Ms. M. Deuri, learned counsel for the petitioners; Ms. M. Bhattacharjee, learned Government advocate, Assam for respondent Nos 1, 2 and 3; and Ms. P. Baruah, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 4, 5,6 and 7. Also heard Mr. P.K. Bora, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 8 and 9. 2. Two petitioners have joined together and have filed the present petition under article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing of the election of Moran College Students Union for the year 2018-19 held on 12.9.2018 and seeking a direction to the respondents for conducting election afresh. 3. The two petitioners are students of Moran College. It is stated that they are regular students of Degree 3rd Semester. Election Committee of Moran College had issued notification on 1.9.2018 calling upon interested and eligible candidates to submit nominations for election to Moran College Students Union for the year 2018-19. In the said notification, schedule of election was mentioned. As per the notification, voting was to take place between 9 a.m. to 12 noon on 10.9.2018 whereafter counting of ballots was to commence from 1 p.m. of the same date. 4. Petitioner No. 1 submitted nomination for the post of General Secretary whereas petitioner No. 2 submitted nomination for the post of Games and Sports Secretary. Though election was scheduled on 10.9.2018, it was deferred to 12.9.2018. 5. According to the petitioners, during the process of voting, many of the students who had entered the ballot booth noticed discrepancies which were brought to the notice of the Returning Officer. Some groups of people having political affiliation had also entered into the college campus on the day of election. It is alleged that rigging had taken place during election. 6. It is also stated that during counting of ballot papers, different methods were adopted by different counting agents, which led to miscalculation in addition of votes. Some of the students agitated before the college administration and asked for recounting of votes. Situation became very tense whereafter Returning Officer notified that counting will recommence from 7 p.m. on that day. However, subsequently, he notified that since no election agents were present, recounting was not possible which would be held on 13.9.2018, i.e., the next day from noon. Some of the students agitated before the college administration and asked for recounting of votes. Situation became very tense whereafter Returning Officer notified that counting will recommence from 7 p.m. on that day. However, subsequently, he notified that since no election agents were present, recounting was not possible which would be held on 13.9.2018, i.e., the next day from noon. Returning Officer clarified that while exercising franchise if the preference mark touched the lines in the ballot paper, then also the vote would be treated as valid. 7. However, the recounting did not take place on the next day. It is alleged that Election Scrutiny Committee favoured certain groups of students. This led to allegations and counter-allegations creating law and order situation. As a result, local administration had to intervene. Circle Officer, Mahmora and police personnel from Moranhat Police Station had to enter the college premises and took away election materials which are presently in their custody. 8. Petitioners represented before the Deputy Commissioner, Charaideo about deficiencies in the counting of votes but it is stated that no remedial steps were taken. It is alleged that college authorities had deliberately created a situation to favour certain candidates who are backed by political parties. 9. With the above grievance, present writ petition came to be filed seeking the reliefs as indicated above. 10. When the writ petition was moved on 3.10.2018, this court directed learned Government advocate to obtain instructions from the Principal of Moran College regarding the actual status of election whereafter report was produced on 11.10.2018 when this court directed the petitioners to file affidavit disclosing therein their class attendance and marks secured by them in the last examination. Following the same, petitioners have filed separate affidavits disclosing their attendance and marks obtained. While attendance of the two petitioners are healthy and marks secured by them are satisfactory, petitioners in their affidavits relied upon the report of the Lyngdoh Committee and have asserted that free and fair elections to student bodies in a democratic set up are very much essential and court has to ensure that purity in the election process is maintained. Therefore, petitioners have come before the court seeking interference and that being young citizens of a healthy democratic country, they have high regards towards the Judiciary. 11. Notice in this case was issued on 26.11.2018. 12. Respondent Nos. Therefore, petitioners have come before the court seeking interference and that being young citizens of a healthy democratic country, they have high regards towards the Judiciary. 11. Notice in this case was issued on 26.11.2018. 12. Respondent Nos. 4, 5, 6 and 7 have filed a common affidavit through Sri Amulya Kr. Saikia, Associate Professor, Department of Zoology, Moran College. Stand taken in the affidavit is that Election Committee of Moran College Students Union had issued notification on 1.9.2018 laying down the schedule of election. Election Committee was constituted with the following members (i) Dr. Mitali Konwar (Principal) — President, (ii) Dr. Amulya Kr. Saikia — Returning Officer, (iii) Dr. Tara Nath Nath — Asstt. Returning Officer, (iv) Dr. Rajib Hazarika — Asstt. Returning Officer, (v) Mrs. Neelima Talukdar — Observer. 13. In addition to the above, an Election Scrutiny Committee was constituted comprising 6 members with Dr. Amulya Kr. Saikia as the Returning Officer. 14. While denying the allegations made by the petitioners, it is admitted that election, which was scheduled initially on 10.9.2018, was held on 12.9.2018 on request of all the contesting candidates for postponing the election on account of Bharat bandh on 10.9.2018. It is stated that allegation of discrepancies in ballot papers and the sizes of stamp were not brought to the notice of the Election Committee. The further allegation that some groups of people having political affiliation had entered into the college campus whereafter rigging was done has been denied. It is stated that no political group or such persons were allowed entry into the college campus during casting of votes. Allegation of rigging has been denied. No such complaint was received by the Election Officers. During counting of votes, uniform method was followed by all the counting officers. Counting was carried out in the presence of counting agents of the candidates. Each ballot paper, either valid or cancelled, were shown to the counting agents. All the counting agents had dully signed the sheets and final counting sheets. No complaint was lodged by any counting agent before the Election Observer or Returning Officer. 15. After receiving counting figures from 8 counting booths, Election Committee was about to put up the result sheets; at that stage, some of the candidates, who had come to know about their imminent defeat in the election, started raising a hue and cry. No complaint was lodged by any counting agent before the Election Observer or Returning Officer. 15. After receiving counting figures from 8 counting booths, Election Committee was about to put up the result sheets; at that stage, some of the candidates, who had come to know about their imminent defeat in the election, started raising a hue and cry. Though the result sheets containing the votes secured by the candidates were pasted in the notice board, final declaration of result could not be made. Two of the contesting candidates expressed doubts over counting in one booth and appealed for recounting of those ballots. But the counting agents of those booths had signed on the counting sheets whereafter no complaints were reported. It is stated that Election Committee did not find any strong ground for recounting. In the mean time, some outsiders entered the college campus and created a chaotic situation. It was under pressure that Election Committee agreed for recounting at 7 p.m., but by that time most of the counting officers and agents had left the college campus. Therefore, recounting was deferred to the next day, i.e., on 13.9.2018. On that day also, most counting agents were not present. Therefore, recounting could not be done. When this fact was brought to the notice of the petitioners, they and their supporters created a chaotic situation. While denying involvement of political parties, it is, however, stated that it was the supporters of the petitioners, who were large in numbers, who had created an unruly situation in the college campus leading to a sense of panic. Local administration had intervened in the matter. Since no solution could be arrived at, the ballot boxes along with the election documents were taken into custody by the local police station as per instruction of Circle Officer, Mahmora Circle. Deputy Commissioner, Charaideo had also intervened in the matter. Because of the tense situation created by the petitioners and their supporters, final declaration sheet could not be published. 16. Before proceeding further, it would be apposite to refer to the report of Election Committee which was placed before the court by Ms. M. Bhattacharjee, learned Government Advocate, Assam pursuant to order dated 3.10.2018. 17. A perusal of the report dated 28.9.2018 submitted by the Returning Officer to the Principal would go to show that altogether twenty students had submitted nomination papers. M. Bhattacharjee, learned Government Advocate, Assam pursuant to order dated 3.10.2018. 17. A perusal of the report dated 28.9.2018 submitted by the Returning Officer to the Principal would go to show that altogether twenty students had submitted nomination papers. Out of the twenty candidates, seven got elected uncontested. Two of the contesting candidates withdrew their nominations. Though election was scheduled on 10.9.2018, because of Bharat bandh, it was deferred to 12.9.2018. Total numbers of voters were 3191. In the election, 1583 had cast their votes. Voting was done in a peaceful and congenial atmosphere. Counting of votes started from 1 p.m. of the same day at eight booth centers in the presence of counting agents of all contesting candidates. Till that time, it was all very peaceful. At around 4 p.m. all the eight centers deposited their counting results along with ballot boxes to the Returning Officer whereafter compilation of votes cast was carried out. When compilation was going on, two of the contesting candidates, namely, Smti. Pubali Gharphalia, who had contested for Magazine Secretary and Sri Dipankar Chetia, who had contested for Social Service Secretary lodged complaint that Presiding Officers of certain booths had rejected votes on the ground that in some of the ballot papers, the voter had put the cross mark against the name of the candidate and not in the box designed for that purpose though this was accepted by the other Presiding Officers; therefore, recounting was demanded. While compilation of counting result was in progress, there was a hue and cry in front of the administrative building. When the compilation results were put up in the notice board, there was slogan shouting in the college campus. Situation became unruly and after a while went out of control. At this stage, Returning Officer notified that recounting would be done at 7 p.m. of that day itself but except five contesting candidates, others were absent for which recounting could not be done. Supporters of a few candidates staged dhama in the college campus and did not allow the Returning Officer along with members of the Election Committee to leave office. Protest continued till late night, i.e., around 2 a.m. whereafter Sub-Deputy Collector sealed the ballot boxes after putting signature. It was decided that recounting would be done on the next day in presence of police. Protest continued till late night, i.e., around 2 a.m. whereafter Sub-Deputy Collector sealed the ballot boxes after putting signature. It was decided that recounting would be done on the next day in presence of police. Ballot boxes were kept in the office room of the Principal under CCTV surveillance. 18. On the next day, recounting could not be carried out because the Returning Officer fell sick. Because of the above, a conflict situation prevailed in the college campus. Military personnel along with Assam Police personnel had to keep strict vigil to ensure that the situation did not spiral out of control. Principal assured the students and tried to calm down the situation. Emergent meeting of the Governing Body was held. Finally college authority declared at 8 p.m. that declaration of election result was postponed for an indefinite period because of prevailing tense situation; till then all the ballot boxes were directed to be kept under the custody of Sub-Deputy Collector, Moranhat Circle, Charaideo district. Accordingly, Sub-Deputy Collector took over possession of the ballot boxes. 19. Submissions made by learned counsel for the parties have been considered. 20. The two petitioners before the court are college students of tender age. The narration of events as above gives an impression as if it was not a college election but some kind of a general election which had taken place. A perusal of the averments made in the writ petition and the affidavits filed by the petitioners display a streak of defiant nature of the petitioners. Unsubstantiated allegations have been made against the Election Committee as well as Election Scrutiny Committee which consist of teachers of Moran College, who are teachers of the petitioners too. Petitioners have alleged bias and other allegations against the teachers without any materials. However, materials on record disclose lawlessness on the part of a group of students in the college campus of Moran College for which a routine event like holding of election to college students union could not be carried out. Report of the Returning Officer dated 28.9.2018 is quite revealing. Some of the students had sat on a dhama on the election day and did not allow the Returning Officer as well as members of Election Committee to leave office. They continued their protest till 2 a.m. at night when the Returning Officer had to give an undertaking of recounting. Report of the Returning Officer dated 28.9.2018 is quite revealing. Some of the students had sat on a dhama on the election day and did not allow the Returning Officer as well as members of Election Committee to leave office. They continued their protest till 2 a.m. at night when the Returning Officer had to give an undertaking of recounting. It is beyond comprehension as to why a group of students should be in the college campus staging dhamas and protest till 2 a.m. at night, that too, against their own teachers. It is not known whether parents of the students were aware of such unruly conduct of their wards. A situation was created on election day which compelled intervention by military personnel as well as by police personnel. On the other hand, petitioners have stated in their affidavits that they being young citizens of a healthy democracy, they seek enforcement of their fundamental right. There is inherent contradiction in what happened and what is contended. 21. There is no fundamental right to become President or Secretary or office bearer of a college students union. There is also no fundamental right to indulge in unruly behaviour in college campus holding the college to ransom. An ordinary event like election to a college students union cannot be allowed to become a flashpoint requiring intervention even by an authority like the Deputy Commissioner of the district, not to speak of police personnel. It is the duty of the college administration to maintain discipline in the college campus and to root out unruly behaviour. 22. Government of India in the Ministry of Human Resource Development had constituted a committee on 12.12.2005 to make recommendations and suggestions relating to elections to students union in the country. This committee was headed by Mr. J.M. Lyngdoh, a former Chief Election Commissioner. A series of recommendations were made by the Committee including eligibility criteria of candidates and code of conduct for the candidates. Report of the committee was placed before the Supreme Court in the case of University of Kerala v. Council, Principals' Colleges, Kerala, (2006) 8 SCC 304. Supreme Court accepted the recommendations and directed recommendations mentioned therein to be implemented subject to modifications. Amongst others, the committee provided for a grievance redressal mechanism which had the approval of the Supreme Court. 23. Supreme Court accepted the recommendations and directed recommendations mentioned therein to be implemented subject to modifications. Amongst others, the committee provided for a grievance redressal mechanism which had the approval of the Supreme Court. 23. The college authority may consider putting in place such a grievance redressal mechanism to look into election related grievances in future. 24. Cancellation of an election process is a drastic measure. There must be strong irrefutable evidence to prove complete vitiation of the electoral process for the court to cancel the same and directing holding of election afresh. In the instant case, following are the averments made by the petitioners to justify cancellation of election and for holding of fresh election “7. That, the petitioners beg to state that after the election when counting took place the petitioners along with other candidates noticed that different techniques are adopted by different counting agents to count the valid votes and there is miscalculations in adding the votes obtained by the candidates. The students agitated the matter before the College administration and also asked for recounting of the votes in proper manner and using same methods for counting valid votes. The situation has become tensed and, thus, the Returning Officer seeing the situation on very date issued two notices and hanged in the college notice board that re-counting will take place from 7.00 p.m. on that very day, i.e., 12.9.18 and in the 2nd notice he stated that the counting could not take place on 12.9.18 after 7 p.m. as there were no election agent present and, therefore, recounting will be on 13.8.18 (12.00 noon) and also stated that if the lines are touched then also the votes will be counted as valid. 8. That, the petitioners beg to state that the re-counting has never happened as the Election Scrutiny Committee of the said college are favouring the students who were supported by political parties and want to bring those to the Student Union Body of the College. The issue has turn to such a situation among the students (candidates and their supporters) that allegation and counter-allegations started pouring up between them and the law and order situation arose in the town which lead to filing of criminal cases against each other. There were as many as 4/6 criminal cases lodged in the Moranhat Police Station related to this election. ********* 11. There were as many as 4/6 criminal cases lodged in the Moranhat Police Station related to this election. ********* 11. That, the petitioners beg to state that now they have come to know that the Election results will be declared at any moment without re-counting and without proper enquiry of the entire illegalities starting from printing of Ballot papers to the size of stamp. The petitioners also came to know that all these were done in a planned manner to make the favourable candidates win the election who were supported by political parties and for this reason the petitioners have come before this hon'ble court seeking intervention of the court and praying for cancellation of the election of Moran College Student Union 2018-19 held on 12.9.18 for ends of justice.” 25. Averments of the petitioners as extracted above, are devoid of specifics. On the basis of such vague and bald allegations, interference by the court is not possible. That apart, academic session for the year 2018-19 is almost over and a new academic session is about to commence following admission and counseling in July-August, 2019. 26. In such circumstances, no case for quashing of election is made out. Consequently, question of issuing any direction for holding of election afresh for the year 2018-19 does not arise. Writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed.