Sat Sep 06 19:23:29 UTC 2025: Okay, here’s a summary of the text and a rewritten news article:

**Summary:**

The Delhi High Court has asked Delhi University (DU) to respond to a petition challenging a new election rule requiring student candidates to provide a ₹1-lakh surety with a parent or guardian signature. The All India Students’ Association argues the rule discriminates against students from lower socio-economic backgrounds and limits their right to run for office. While DU officials haven’t commented, the Chief Election Officer maintains the surety is only forfeited for violating anti-defacement rules and that friends or relatives can sign if parents/guardians are unavailable. The rule was implemented after widespread defacement marred last year’s elections. The court has given DU four weeks to respond to the petition, with elections scheduled for September 18.

**News Article:**

**Delhi High Court Challenges DU’s Election Surety Rule**

**New Delhi, September 7, 2025:** The Delhi High Court has directed Delhi University (DU) to respond to a petition challenging its newly implemented election rule requiring student candidates to furnish a ₹1-lakh surety, co-signed by a parent or guardian. The rule has sparked controversy, with student organizations alleging it unfairly restricts participation in student government.

The petition, filed by members of the All India Students’ Association (AISA), claims the surety requirement disproportionately impacts students from modest socio-economic backgrounds, effectively barring them from running for office. AISA argues the rule infringes upon students’ fundamental right to contest elections.

Several student groups have voiced their opposition, arguing the rule undermines student autonomy and treats them as minors.

While DU officials have declined to comment, citing the ongoing legal proceedings, Chief Election Officer Raj Kishore Sharma attempted to clarify the rule earlier this week. Sharma stated that the surety is only forfeited in cases of anti-defacement violations and that friends or relatives can sign in place of unavailable parents or guardians. He insists the rule is a “technical requirement” and not a deposit.

The controversy stems from the aftermath of last year’s DU student elections, which were marred by widespread defacement, leading to a two-month delay in the counting of votes. University officials introduced the surety clause this year to deter such violations, viewing the parent/guardian signature as a formal guarantee.

University officials say compliance with the new rule has been high, leading to cleaner elections so far, with the North Campus notably free from defacement. A new online portal for complaints has also been launched, but no complaints have been received.

The Delhi High Court has granted Delhi University four weeks to file its response. Election counting is scheduled for September 18, adding urgency to the matter.

Read More