Supreme Court asks Centre, ECI to respond to plea seeking postal ballot rights for students away from home

The Supreme Court on Wednesday sought responses from the Central government, the Election Commission of India (ECI) and the University Grants Commission (UGC) to a plea seeking postal ballot facilities and other voting mechanisms for students studying outside their home constituencies [Jayasudhagar J vs. Union of India]. .A Bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta and NV Anjaria issued notice in the matter after briefly hearing submissions on the difficulties faced by student voters in exercising their voting rights..Senior Advocate K Parameshwar, appearing for the petitioner, argued that although students form a large and distinct class of electors, the present election framework does not recognise them as a separate category for the purpose of providing alternative voting arrangements.When the Bench questioned the nature of the grievance and referred to the existing system of postal ballots, Parameshwar clarified that postal ballot facilities are not available to students. He submitted that when the age of adult suffrage was lowered from 21 to 18 years, the entire group of young voters should have been extended corresponding facilities to enable them to vote.He argued that students studying away from their home constituencies are placed in a position where they are practically unable to travel back on polling day and yet are denied any alternative voting mechanism..The petition raises a constitutional challenge to the exclusion of students from postal voting under the Representation of the People Act, 1951 and the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961. It argues that while certain categories of voters, such as service voters, persons on election duty and those in preventive detention, are allowed to vote by postal ballot, students are left out despite facing similar constraints.According to the petitioner, this exclusion results in the effective disenfranchisement of student voters and violates the guarantee of equality under Article 14 of the Constitution. The plea also invokes Article 326, which mandates elections on the basis of adult suffrage, and contends that denying students a meaningful opportunity to vote defeats the constitutional promise that every citizen above the age of eighteen can exercise the franchise..The petition further argues that voting is an expression of political choice protected under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, and that preventing students from voting due to lack of leave, holidays or postal ballot options curtails this freedom. It also contends that participation in elections is an aspect of dignity and democratic participation protected under Article 21.The plea refers to representations made by the petitioner to his university seeking leave on polling day, which were rejected on the ground that elections were not taking place in the area where the institution was located. It also relies on election data showing that a substantial portion of India’s electorate falls within the 18–29 age group, many of whom pursue higher education away from their home constituencies.The petitioner has sought directions to extend postal ballot facilities to students, to grant leave or holidays on polling days to enable travel, and to frame appropriate guidelines or amend election rules to ensure that students are not deprived of their right to vote..The petition was filed through Advocate Jose Abraham. .Follow Bar and Bench channel on WhatsAppDownload the Bar and Bench Mobile app for instant access to the latest legal news.