$~43 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010472442026 + W.P.(C) 14499/2026, CM APPL. 67964/2026 VIJAY SHANKAR MEENA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Vimal Tyagi and Mr. Balaji Pathak, Advs. alongwith petitioner in person versus UNIVERSITY OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Adhitya Srinivasan, Mr. Rishi Raj Singh, Advocates for R5 (M- 9305781204) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE O R D E R % 30.09.2026 1. By virtue of the present petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, or a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari, calling for the records pertaining to the Delhi University Student’s Union (DUSU) Election, 2026-27, including the EVM/ counting records, and quash and set aside the results declared thereunder on 19.09.2026 for the post of President. 2. At the outset, this Court notes that learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to rely upon unverified and unsubstantiated photographs and videos, which are admittedly bereft of any basic particulars/ details as to when, where and under what circumstances were they taken, and/ or by whom. This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 05/10/2026 at 11:17:15 Moreover, not all of them shown therein have been arrayed as parties herein. So much so, one such photograph (page 31) itself records that it is “AI-generated content”. In fact, learned counsel for the petitioner candidly acknowledges that one of the videos is in fact subsequent to the declaration of the results in the elections. 3. Alas, under such circumstances this Court cannot be called upon to initiate any action(s) in the present petition against the Delhi University, particularly, whence the very foundation being the photographs and the videos are suspect. 4. In view thereof, though learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to rely upon Clause 6.3.1 and Clause 6.7.13 of the Lyngdoh Committee Report, however, since they are only pertaining to “… …the period of the elections… …”, and since the petitioner has failed to establish the period involved, the same cannot come to the aid of petitioner. 5. For the aforesaid reasons, the present petition, alongwith the pending application, is dismissed. 6. De hors the aforesaid, learned counsel for the Delhi University submits that the representation made by the petitioner though filed only four days ago, will be decided as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law. SAURABH BANERJEE, J SEPTEMBER 30, 2026/rr This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 05/10/2026 at 11:17:15