Disposed

Abhin K v. the Director of Technical Education

Kerala HC1 Sept 2016WP(C)/24694/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging a stay order re-strengthening the petitioner's suspension for alleged ragging, the Court directed the college authorities to complete the enquiry within two weeks and permitted the petitioner to register for the 5th semester subject to eligibility and the final decision on suspension.

What did the court decide?

Directions to complete the suspension enquiry within two weeks and permission to register for the 5th semester course.

Abhin K Vs the Director of Technical Education — Education and Admissions | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2016/10TH BHADRA, 1938

¶5

WP(C).No. 24694 of 2016 (J)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

ABHIN K,

¶8

S/O.SIVARAMAN, AGED 21 YEARS, KUNNUMAL HOUSE, CHAMAL PO, THAMARASSERY, KOZHIKKODE DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

1. THE DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPRUAM, PIN 695 001.

¶12

2. THE KANNUR UNIVERSITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, KANNUR, PIN 670 001.

¶13

3. THE PRINCIPAL, GOVERNMENT ENGINEERING COLLEGE WAYANAD, MANANTHAWADY, WAYNAD DISTRICT, PIN 670 645.

¶14

R1 & 3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.LILLY K.T. R2 BY ADV. SRI.M.SASINDRAN, SC

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01-09-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

¶17

WP(C).No. 24694 of 2016 (J)

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶20

P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED, 8.2.2016 IN WPC NO.35177/2015 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT

¶21

P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 23.3.2016 AS NO.C1/1762/2016 (1)

¶22

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS

¶23

R3(A) COPY OF UNDERTAKING SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER ON 15/2/16

¶24

R3(B) COPY OF ORDER OF R3 DATED 15/2/16 PURSUANT TO THE UNDERTAKING OF THE PETITIONER

¶25

R3(C) COPY OF THE ENQUIRY REPORT DATED 17/3/16

¶26

R3(D) COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE COLLEGE COUNCIL HELD ON 18/3/16.

/ TRUE COPY /

P.S. TO JUDGE

A.M. SHAFFIQUE, J.

¶31

=============== W.P. (C) No. 24694 of 2016

¶32

==================

¶33

Dated this, the 1^st day of September, 2016

¶34

J U D G M E N T

¶35

This writ petition is filed challenging Ext.P2 by which the petitioner had been restrained from attending College on the ground that he had violated the undertaking given earlier as per directions issued by this Court in judgment dated 8/2/2016 in WP(C) No. 35177/2015. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was placed under suspension earlier on the allegation that he was involved in ragging, along with certain other students. Some students including the petitioner approached this Court by filing WP (C) No. 35177/2015, which was disposed of in the following manner:-

¶36

“It is reported that no proceedings are pending as on today against the petitioner except the criminal case registered by the Police in regard to ragging. The criminal court has to take the proceedings to a logical end on the basis of the final report made by the Police and also the inputs from the third respondent college.

¶37

2. The petitioners in the meanwhile, are permitted to attend the classes and submit the projects in order to complete their course. The petitioners shall

¶38

W.P(C) No.24694/2016

¶39

-:2:-

¶40

not participate in any extracurricular activities other than academic exercises and further assures this Court an exemplary behaviour in future.

¶41

3. A written undertaking shall be filed by the petitioners before the third respondent within a week from today. The third respondent on receipt of such undertaking shall permit the petitioner to attend the classes and participate in the academic exercises as directed.

¶42

The writ petition is disposed of. “

¶43

Pursuant to the said direction, petitioners therein have given an undertaking and suspension was revoked. However, again on 23/3/2016, on the allegation that the petitioner was again involved in certain issues, which occurred in the College on 15/3/2016, he was temporarily restrained from attending the College as he had violated the undertaking given pursuant to the directions of this Court and the matter was referred to the Director of Technical Education, the 1^st respondent, for further action in the matter. Petitioner submits that, so far, no action has been taken in the matter and the petitioner during the pendency of this writ petition had filed a complaint to the Director, Students Grievance Cell, Kannur University to enquire into the matter and

¶44

W.P(C) No.24694/2016

¶45

-:3:-

¶46

to permit him to complete the studies. It is also submitted that the petitioner is not involved in any of the aforesaid acts as alleged in Ext.P2 and therefore, this Court should interfere in the matter. An application is also filed to permit the petitioner to register for the 5^th Semester course.

¶47

Counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent Principal, inter alia stating that after having given an undertaking as per directions issued by this Court, petitioner along with certain students created commotion when classes were being taken, pursuant to which, enquiry was conducted by a Committee consisting of three faculty members and the enquiry report clearly indicated that the petitioner was also involved in the incident which happened on 15/3/2016. Pursuant to the said report, the College Council held a meeting on 18/3/2016 and decided to call the parents and in the meantime, having found that the petitioner has violated the conditions in the undertaking, it was recommended to report the violation of bail conditions and undertaking submitted by them to the investigation officer and to the High Court through Advocate General and the Director of Technical Education. It was recommended to suspend certain

¶48

W.P(C) No.24694/2016

¶49

-:4:-

¶50

students as well. It is submitted by the respondents that the petitioner was under suspension and continued to be so since he has violated the conditions in the undertaking. In other words, the permission to continue students as per directions issued by this Court had been withdrawn and therefore the suspension continues to be in force.

¶51

Learned standing counsel appearing for the University submits that the University has a procedure for adjudication of Students Grievances as contained in Chapter XXIX of the Kannur University First Statutes, 1998. As per clause (5) of Chapter XXIX, the complaint shall ordinarily to be sent to the Chairman through the University Union or the Principal of the College concerned and as soon as the Chairman receives any complaint seeking redressal of any grievance of the students of Colleges, he shall conduct a preliminary enquiry and if it is found necessary to place the same before the Board, it shall be done so. Thereafter, the Board shall decide whether the complaint shall be entertained or not. The procedure by which the Board is to consider the complaint is specified in Clause (6).

¶52

Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side.

¶53

W.P(C) No.24694/2016

¶54

-:5:-

¶55

Taking into consideration the overall factual circumstances involved in the matter, it is now apparent that the petitioner had been out of the College since a long time. He was suspended from the College on 5/11/2015 and it is by virtue of the direction issued by this Court dated 8/2/2016 in WP(C) No. 35177/15 that he was permitted to continue on his giving an undertaking. Since he had violated the undertaking, the said permission had been withdrawn. Now substantial time has elapsed and, so far, no action had been taken either by the Principal or by the Director of Technical Education. In fact, suspension proceedings dated 5/11/2015 and the further proceedings pursuant to the enquiry conducted with reference to the incident on 15/3/2016 have to reach a logical conclusion as far as the College is concerned.

¶56

In the said circumstances, I am of the view that the following directions can be issued in order to expedite the matter. Learned counsel for the petitioner also seeks for a permission to register the student for the 5^th Semester Course failing which it is stated that he will not be able to continue the course as well. Hence, the following directions are issued:-

¶57

(i) The Principal/Director of Technical Education shall

¶58

W.P(C) No.24694/2016

¶59

-:6:-

¶60

complete the enquiry in the matter relating to suspension of the petitioner within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and appropriate directions shall be issued in that regard.

¶61

(ii) In the meantime, the petitioner shall be permitted to register for the 5^th semester course, if he is otherwise eligible. However, the same shall be subject to the decision to be taken by the College authorities/Director of Technical Education in this regard.

¶62

(iii) The right of the petitioner to approach the University is left open to be decided after a decision is taken by the Principal/Director of Technical Education.

¶63

Writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶64

Sd/-

¶65

A.M. SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE

¶66

Rp2/09/2016

¶67

//True Copy//

¶68

P.S to Judge

Abhin K v. the Director of Technical Education

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhin K v. the Director of Technical Education

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prasad Vs Shibu C

Roshini C.B. Vs State of Kerala

Abdu T.P. Vs Sundaram Bnp Paribas Home Fianance Ltd.

M/S.Bristo Foods Pvt. Ltd. Vs M/S.Canara Bank

Mariya P.A. Vs M.G.University

Achutha Kumar K.V Vs Indusind Bank Limited