Md. Tasneem Reza Vs Aligarh Muslim University and Another

Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to implead the Proctor of Aligarh Muslim University as respondent No. 3. He is permitted to do so during the course of the day.

¶12

This writ petition has been filed with the prayer for the issuance of a mandamus commanding respondents No. 1 and 2 to decide the representation of the petitioner dated 09.05.2026 and directing the respondents to allow the petitioner to appear in the counselling for submission of documents for admission to the Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering for the session 2025-26.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a supplementary affidavit, which is taken on record. He has placed an office memo dated 21.11.2024 to contend that, in similar circumstances, an action was proposed under Section 35(3) of the University Statute, and it was only thereafter, when the final order was passed, that the candidature for the P.G. Diploma in Mass Communication was rejected. However, in the present case, on instructions, counsel for the respondent-University has submitted that, under the Rules in the 'Guide to Admission' of Aligarh Muslim University, which have been approved and ratified by the competent bodies of the University, including the Academic Council, certain 'Important Information and Rules' were issued. In points No. 48, 49, and 57, it has been mentioned that all admissions shall be provisional and subject to clearance from the Office of the Proctor.

¶14

WRIC No. 19272 of 2026

¶15

2

¶16

He has also placed on record that Sri Shashank Shekhar Singh, Advocate for the respondent-University, along with his instructions, has submitted a letter dated 09.05.2026, sent by the Proctor of Aligarh Muslim University, wherein it has been observed that, earlier on 05.07.2023, a show-cause notice was issued to the petitioner for being involved, along with two other students, in a brutal physical assault. Similarly, he was also issued a show-cause notice on 27.02.2026 for leading a violent and unruly mob of students that attempted to forcibly break open the main entrance gate of the Office of the Proctor, raised derogatory and threatening slogans against university functionaries, disrupted the official functioning of the Office of the Proctor, and created an atmosphere of terror. He has further submitted that the show cause was issued for violation of Part-II, Rule-4 clauses (i),(iii),(iv), and (xxiii) of the AMU Students' Conduct and Discipline Rules, 1985.

¶17

However, this Court finds that neither the proceedings which may have been initiated in pursuance of the show-cause notice dated 05.07.2023 nor those initiated pursuant to the show-cause notice dated 27.02.2026 were brought to their logical end.

¶18

In view of the above, counsel for the petitioner submits that clearance from the Office of the Proctor could have only been accorded if the proceedings pursuant to the show-cause notices dated 05.07.2023 and 27.02.2026 had been brought to their logical end, in adherence to the procedure prescribed and to the principles of natural justice.

¶19

Considering the above, Sri Shashank Shekhar Singh, Advocate for the respondent-University, submits that the said proceedings shall be brought to their logical end, and a fresh order regarding the requirement of clearance from the Office of the Proctor shall be passed.

¶20

In light of the above, and with the consent of the parties, the matter is relegated to the newly impleaded respondent No. 3, i.e., the Proctor of A.M.U., Aligarh, since the show-cause notice dated 27.02.2026 for violation of Part II, Rule 4 of the AMU Students' Conduct and Discipline Rules, 1985, has been stated to have been issued by him. He shall take an appropriate decision after considering the reply dated 01.03.2026, and if

¶21

WRIC No. 19272 of 2026

¶22

3

¶23

required, a further opportunity may also be given to the petitioner. Once a final order is passed, he shall pass a fresh order giving appropriate reasons on the subject of clearance for the purpose of admission to the Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering for the session 2025-26.

¶24

The aforesaid exercise shall be completed expeditiously, preferably within a period of one month from the date of service of a copy of this order.

¶25

With the aforesaid directions/observations, the writ petition stands disposed of.

¶26

(Siddharth Nandan,J.)

¶27

May 18, 2026

¶28

piyush

¶29

Digitally signed by :- PIYUSH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Md. Tasneem Reza v. Aligarh Muslim University and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md. Tasneem Reza v. Aligarh Muslim University and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Honey vs State of U.P. and Another

Suchit Kumar Dixit vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Suchit Kumar Dixit Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Committee of Management, Shikarpur Siksha Vikas Samiti and Another Vs State of U.P. and 8 Others

Smt. Shabnam Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Mahendrapal Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others