KSA student membership appoints almost 30 new councillors at SGM

Student members of the Kwantlen Student Association conducted a special general meeting (SGM) on May 30 at Kwantlen Polytechnic University’s Surrey Conference Centre.

The meeting called to remove Vice-President Student Life Ishant Goyal and Students with Disabilities Representative Bhoomika Seera from the KSA through a special resolution, the meeting’s agenda read.

The agenda also included an ordinary resolution to appoint four students to the KSA council: Aditya Kapoor, Tejas Pathania, Gurparv Singh, and Prabhleen Kaur, who were each previously disqualified by Chief Returning Officer (CRO) Gurinder Singh Gaddu from the 2025 KSA general elections for alleged slating after the official results were released.

Students also brought forward another ordinary resolution to appoint several more students to the council. 

As per the Societies Act and the KSA’s bylaws, a special resolution should have two-thirds majority to pass, which means that there should be at least two votes in favour of every one vote opposed. 

An ordinary resolution should pass by a simple majority of the votes cast by the voting members, according to the Societies Act.

The meeting was chaired by external representative Kabir, who refused to give The Runner his last name. Parliamentarian Bob Bahd was present to ensure bylaws and rules were being followed during the meeting.

A number of security personnel were present inside the room after student IDs were verified and voting members were given wristbands. Two KPU representatives were also present inside the conference centre and sat on either side of the front of the room during the meeting.

Several KSA council members were also in attendance in their capacity as student members. 

Students first adopted the rules of order for the meeting, which were based on the Robert’s Rules of Order. Bahd then announced that a quorum of 100 members was met to begin voting. 

The first motion, a special resolution to remove Goyal and Seera from their positions, was put on the floor.

“I believe the KPU students are aware of the governance structure within the KSA and I believe most of the students are currently fed up with the KSA,” Pathania said during the meeting.

Goyal said in response that everything he’s done at KPU was “out of love, service, and a general commitment to student life.”

“Let’s be honest here, this motion isn’t coming from concern for students — it’s coming from personal agendas and [it] hurts,” Goyal said.

A total of 111 students voted in favour of removing the two councillors from office and 73 students were opposed. A total of 66-per-cent votes in favour were needed for the motion to reach a two-thirds majority. It was ruled the motion was six-per-cent short and thus failed.

The next motion put on the floor was to appoint Pathania, Aditya, Gurparv, and Prabhleen to the KSA council.

“The [KSA’s] bylaws and Societies Act states that a director can only be removed by a special resolution at a special general meeting,” Pathania said.

“So we challenged the CRO’s decision and we asked why [we] didn’t even [get the] chance to respond …. The only thing we got was information that the CRO stands with his decision. There was no evidence presented to us. Nothing.”

Prabhleen said her and Gurparv were disqualified “without justification” or proof and that it was “very planned.”

“I think a new decision should be made for this,” she said.

Goyal said in response that the “data speaks for itself,” adding about 80 votes for the business representative seat were only cast for Pathania, Aditya, and candidate Naimish Kumar and 70 of those votes show a correlation between Gurparv and Prabhleen.

“The CRO is an independent office and is a very judgmental person who knows what to do,” Goyal added.

Prabhleen asked why the CRO didn’t see the alleged slating in the first election results.

“Why does it come from just before the second [council] meeting?” she questioned.

Goyal also said Miller Thompson LLP, the KSA’s legal counsel, advised that the motion to appoint the four students is only valid if the first one to remove him and Seera was approved. He added that according to the KSA’s bylaws, a student representative can only be appointed to council in case of a vacancy.

Bahd said the Societies Act allows for directors to be appointed through an ordinary resolution.

The motion passed with 112 students voting in favour and 93 opposed.

Once the floor was open to additional motions, a student in the audience brought forward one to appoint 23 students to the KSA “to ensure good governance” within council through electing new people with “more governance experience.”

The students in the motion were Sheena Dela Torre, Harkirat Lail, Aastha Sharma, Sanya Gupta, Rajvir Singh Khattra, Anmoldeep Singh, Sandeep Singh, Navroop Singh, Khushpreet Kaur, Hardik Kansal, Harman Singh Sandhar, Simranjot Kaur Sekhon, Harmanjot Singh, Sahildeep Singh, Surmeet Kaur, Akashdeep Toor, Jai Mittal, Divik Dhir, Gagandeep Singh, Gaganjot Sidhu, Sameer Malik, Amarjot Singh, and Nishant Kapoor.

Pathania said the audience can check the fifth section of the ninth article in the KSA bylaws, which reads that voting members of the council shall be faculty, constituency, and campus representatives and “such other persons as are designated by Ordinary Resolution for a term that expires at, or prior to, the next by-election or the subsequent Annual General Meeting.”

“If someone says that the notice of an ordinary solution was not given, I would recommend everyone to see the KPU Announcements,” Pathania said. “[The] announcement clearly mentioned that there would be appointment of new directors.”

In response, Goyal mentioned the fifth article in the student association’s bylaws, which reads that a “general election shall be held in the month of February to elect the Faculty Representatives, Campus Representatives, and Constituency Representatives.”

“If this is the way how meetings are supposed to be done, KPU has 20,000 students and 20,000 students can become directors at [KSA],” Goyal said. “The vacancies can only be filled for faculty, constituency, and campus representatives …. [The people in the motion are] not even eligible.”

The motion to appoint the 23 students passed, with 118 votes in favour and 85 against.

The meeting, which was called to order at 3:08 pm, was adjourned around 4:30 pm.

Background into the petition for an SGM and allegations

The petition to call an SGM had 120 signatures and stated that if the KSA fails to call a meeting within 60 days of receiving the petition, as per the Societies Act, the requisitionists will go ahead with holding the meeting on May 30. KPU student Hardik Kansal served the petition to the KSA on April 24.

During a May 9 council meeting, KSA student representatives voted to call an SGM in the month of July, either on or before July 14.

In an email sent to the KSA on May 15, Kansal wrote that the council selected a range of dates that fall outside the 60-day statutory window.

“The KSA cannot rely on its own inaction or procedural delays to circumvent the clear deadlines established by legislation,” the email read.

Kansal also wrote that the student members made arrangements to issue notice of the SGM to students the following day through KPU Announcements via email and posters across campus in accordance with the bylaws, which require 14 days’ notice to be given to members of the student body.

The email also called for the KSA to issue notice of the meeting on May 30 on its website.

“We do have it on record that we requested you to post the notice on [the] website, 21 days before the SGM, which you denied claiming that the SGM is called by the council,” Kansal wrote.

During a council meeting on May 28, KSA Executive Director Timothii Ragavan proposed a motion that read that notice of the meeting wasn’t posted at least 21 days in advance on the association’s website.

“The notices provided by e-mail and affixing posters [were] done on May 16, 2025, rather than May 15, 2025, and there [were] less than 30 posters per campus,” the motion read. 

KPU Announcements sent out notice of the SGM on May 16, 14 days before the required notice of the meeting as per the bylaws.

A press release posted on the KSA’s website on May 28 notified the student body that the KSA council will not recognize the student-organized SGM due to it not meeting requirements to requisition the meeting.  

In an email sent on May 22, Kansal alleged receiving multiple reports from students being contacted by “one of the directors” via private messages to inquire whether they signed the petition. The email also states that the director, Goyal, continued to contact students in an attempt to “convince them to publicly withdraw their support or claim they never signed in the first place.”

“Several students have expressed that they felt pressured or intimidated, leading them to falsely deny their involvement to end the conversation,” the email read.

Kansal wrote the efforts were being made to “derail or invalidate the SGM,” adding that some students were also threatened with legal action against them. 

“This is a rumour, which has come out from the other side, to spoil off my image because if there were any records, anyone could have complained about that,” Goyal told The Runner in an interview.

The email also included attachments of screenshots depicting Goyal calling the petition “fake” and inquiring whether students signed it.

Goyal told The Runner that he sent the messages to people he knew and his friends to confirm whether the signatures on the petition were theirs since the council had received a “number of concerns” from people who hadn’t signed it.

“In no way I’m threatening in the messages. All I’m asking is, ‘If you have not signed [the petition], or if you know someone has not signed it, please go and report it to [Ragavan],’” he said.

Goyal said while there were people he knew who had signed the petition, he only contacted them to make sure their student number and signatures weren’t being misused.

“This is a serious matter of concern for us.”

He said there were two major concerns he had heard about the signatures on the petition. One was that students weren’t asked to sign the petition and their student names and numbers were taken off of the list. The second concern was that students signing the petition were told about some directors getting appointed to council, but were unaware of Goyal and Seera’s removal.

Goyal said the council is waiting for a forensic analysis of the signatures. The Runner will provide more updates as they become available.

“KPU thinks all these students doing all this stuff is democratic. That is not democratic. All these students trying to do all this stuff is something bigger,” Goyal said.

“These motions are null and void …. If this is how people want to do things, then anyone can come and pass any motion tomorrow.”

“The SGM’s validity will ultimately be determined by student attendance and adherence to democratic process — both of which will be ensured,” Kansal wrote in his May 22 email.