With the Students’ Union (SU) Elections 2025-26 right around the corner, the English Press Club sat down with the Associate Dean, Student Welfare Division (SWD), Prof. Navin Singh, in an effort to know his thoughts on the upcoming election cycle.
When asked about the overlap in functioning of the SU and the SWD, he stated that the SU worked independently because its interest lay in representing the students, and the SWD helped facilitate demands raised by the SU. According to him, the SU and the SWD usually had a cordial relationship, contrary to how some perceive it. He noted that there had been some instances of conflict, which he described as ‘sometimes correct, sometimes not’.
He added that the SWD was needed because sometimes the demands were not genuine. Even for genuine demands, he said that achieving them may not be very easy. He claimed that the administration was more experienced in looking after matters like the funds and feasibility, which may be overlooked in ‘excitement’.
When asked about the outgoing Union Council, he said that they were ‘very good and very creative’, and they did not let up while pushing their agendas. He commended them for working hard, but also mentioned that some issues could have been presented in a ‘better way’. When asked about which issues he was referring to, he replied, ‘The message is clear to everyone, regarding what I’d like to say.’
Regarding his expectations from the candidates, he said that everyone should keep the betterment of students in mind. He continued that they should also employ a broader perspective rather than that of ‘a typical Indian politician’, whose aim was to appease specific demographics. He expected ‘well-educated’ students to not only focus on the popular areas but also look at the bigger picture.
He also denounced any sort of political propaganda being employed by a campaigner, adding that one should not contest elections like ‘politicians’. According to him, if the candidate had a firm belief in their policies, they did not need propaganda. He added that only those who did not have a good manifesto engaged in such acts.
He emphasised that everyone should vote, irrespective of the outcome. He added that if one did not like any candidate, they could make their displeasure known by voting NOTA.
He further said that each student should carefully read the points mentioned in a candidate’s manifesto. He emphasised that every student should thoroughly analyse a candidate’s promises and question them on their implementation. He concluded the interview by saying that voters should not just look at what is said, but also look at the why and how of it, just like any math or science problem.