Allowed

Y.Jayasingh v. Presidency College

Madras HC25 Jan 2016WP/528/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Two writ petitions challenged the college's decision to keep petitioners, who were student-accused under the Indian Penal Code, in suspension. The High Court held that mere pendency of a case without inquiry cannot justify continued suspension. It set aside the orders and directed the college to permit attendance.

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders of suspension set aside; respondent directed to permit petitioners to attend the college.

Y.Jayasingh Vs Presidency College — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 25.01.2016

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH

¶5

W.P. No.528 and 529 of 2016 and WMP.Nos.362 to 365 of 2016

¶6

V.Jayasingh ... Petitioner in W.P.528/16 M.Gopinath ... Petitioner in W.P.529/16

¶7

Vs.

¶8

Presidency College Rep by its Principal, Kamarajar Salai, Triplicane, Chennai – 600 005. ... Respondent in both WPs

¶9

Prayer in W.P. No. 528 of 2016: Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of certiorari calling for the records pertaining to the impugned orders (I) N.K.No. 6743/Q/2015-2 dated 26.10.2015 and (II) N.K. No. 6743/Q/2015-2 dated 03.11.2015 on the file of the respondent and quash the same.

¶10

Prayer in W.P. No. 529 of 2016: Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of certiorari calling for the records pertaining to the impugned orders (I) N.K.No. 6743/Q/2015-1 dated 26.10.2015 and (II) N.K. No. 6743/Q/2015-1 dated 03.11.2015 on the file of the respondent and quash the same.

¶11

For Petitioners : Mr.R.Neelakandan. For Respondent : Mrs.P.Rajalakshmi, Government Advocate. COMMON ORDER

¶12

As the issues involved in both the writ petitions are one and the same, they have been taken up together and disposed of by a common order.

¶13

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶14

The petitioners are the students of the respondentCollege. A case has been registered in C.R.No. 1318 of 2015, for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 147, 143, 341, 353 and 332 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 5 of the TNPPP (D&L) Act. In pursuance of the said compliant, the petitioners were arrested and later on, they were released on bail. However, in view of the pendency of the criminal case, followed by the arrest of the petitioners, they were kept under suspension from the college. Challenging the said orders of suspension passed by the respondent, the present writ petitions are filed by the petitioners before this Court.

¶15

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate for the respondent.

¶16

Considering the above facts and the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate, it is clear that admittedly, as of now, neither any inquiry has been conducted nor any action has been independently initiated by the respondent against the petitioners. Mere pendency of the criminal case, by itself cannot be a bar to keep the students continuously under suspension as they have already been under suspension for sometime now. Therefore, there is no necessity to continue the suspension of the petitioners, as the same cannot also be termed as a punishment. In such view of the matter, the impugned orders of the respondent are set aside and consequentially, the respondent is directed to permit the petitioners to attend the college.

¶17

In the result, the writ petitions are allowed on the aforesaid terms. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. No costs.

¶18

Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS IV)

¶19

//True Copy//

¶20

rms

¶21

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶22

¶23

The Principal, Presidency College Kamarajar Salai, Triplicane, Chennai – 600 005.

¶24

+2cc's to Mr.R.Neelakandan, Advocate, S.R.No.4265 & 4264

¶25

W.P.No. 528 and 529 of 2016
AD(CO)
CA(28/01/2016)

¶26

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Y.Jayasingh v. Presidency College

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Y.Jayasingh v. Presidency College

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

C.Prema Vs The District Collector

R.Nagaraj, Vs The Tahsildar

Gopal Vs The Chairman

Kongu Nadu Vettuva Gounder Vs The District Collector

V.Palanivelu Vs Joint Sub Inspector

K.Kandsamy Vs The Inspector of Police