Following the Punjab University student union elections, where news of ABVP candidate Ankit Bidhan’s victory has emerged, the student team ASAP, associated with the Aam Aadmi Party, has announced that it will challenge the entire election and, specifically, the electoral eligibility of the ABVP candidate before the High Court.
ASAP said that even before the elections, it had formally informed the Punjab University administration about serious concerns about the eligibility of the ABVP candidate, academic record, alleged Unfair Means (UMC) case, eligibility to contest the elections, and documents. According to ASAP, the administration had also assured the team that the matter would be taken into cognizance, but no effective action was taken until the elections were completed.
ASAP said that the entire matter will now be placed before the Punjab and Haryana High Court, where the question will be raised as to how a candidate was allowed to contest the elections without deciding on serious objections regarding his eligibility that were already in the university’s knowledge.
“How can the result of an election where candidature was questioned before the elections be considered valid without an inquiry?”
ASAP alleged that there are serious facts concerning Ankit Bidhan’s academic and disciplinary record, which should have been considered as part of the electoral process. According to the team, Bidhan failed several examinations while pursuing LL.B. at Punjab University and also faced a case of Unfair Means, following which he was debarred from the university from 2023 to 2025.
ASAP also said that despite this, he later took admission to a PhD programme at Punjab University on the basis of an MA degree obtained from Gujarat’s Sabarmati University. The team has also raised serious questions regarding the eligibility for this admission and the validity of the related documents.
ASAP claimed that an independent and impartial inquiry into the candidate’s academic eligibility and documents was necessary, but despite these questions, he was allowed to contest the elections.
Reference to Lyngdoh Committee Rules
ASAP referred to the Lyngdoh Committee recommendations applicable to student elections and said that the university should have examined the candidate’s disciplinary and academic record in relation to electoral eligibility.
The team said that if a student has been debarred from the university on disciplinary grounds or there is a serious situation concerning his academic/disciplinary matters, then examination of his electoral eligibility cannot be treated as merely a formality.
“Our question is not about any particular individual, but about the fairness of the entire electoral process. If the rules are the same for all students, how can they be different for a candidate of a certain political organisation?” — ASAP
Informed Administration Before Elections, Yet Elections Were Conducted: ASAP Team Will Now Seek Answers in Court
ASAP said that the most serious question concerns the role of the Punjab University administration. The team claimed that before the elections, the administration had already been informed about all these objections and questions related to the documents, and the administration had said that it would look into the matter.
Despite this, the election process moved forward and voting was conducted.
ASAP said that there will now be no answer sought merely at the administrative level, but at the judicial level.
The team will soon approach the Punjab and Haryana High Court and seek that the candidate’s electoral eligibility, the documents submitted by him, and his alleged disciplinary record be subjected to a fair inquiry, and if any violation of election rules is found, an appropriate legal decision also be taken regarding the validity of the election result.
ASAP clarified that its agenda is not limited to the victory or defeat of any student organisation. The question is whether rules in university student elections will apply equally to everyone or whether different standards will be applied to some candidates on the basis of political influence.
ASAP said that if serious questions regarding a candidate’s eligibility had already been placed before the university administration before the elections, then conducting the elections without resolving them raises questions over the transparency of the entire process.
“If the documents are correct, there is no need to fear an inquiry. If the eligibility is valid, it will be proved in court as well. But it cannot be accepted that a victory is treated as the final truth even before an inquiry.”