Are you looking for a legal research tool ?
Get Started
Do check other products like LIBIL, a legal due diligence tool to get a litigation check report and Case Management tool to monitor and collaborate on cases.

Satyam Rai v. Banaras Hindu University And 4 Another

Satyam Rai v. Banaras Hindu University And 4 Another

(High Court Of Judicature At Allahabad)

WRIT - C No. - 18847 of 2023 | 17-08-2023

Kshitij Shailendra, J.

1. Heard Shri Ashish Kumar Srivastava, learned Advocate, holding brief of Shri Ajay Kumar Rai, learned counsel for the petitioner, Ms.Mamta Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents-University and perused the record.

2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 8.8.2022 whereby the University has discontinued his studies and put a restrain on him to visit or stay in any of the hostels of the University.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that some incident took place on 1/2.12.2021 between two groups of students at Sardar Vallabh Bhai Patel Hostel and raising allegations of causing indiscipline against various persons including the petitioner, action was proposed by the University. Further submission is that concerned Disciplinary Authority fixed three dates of hearing, i.e., 13.5.2022, 19.5.2022 and 02.6.2022 and insofar as first two dates are concerned, the petitioner submitted a written application dated 18.5.2022 stating that his semester examinations were held on the said two dates and, therefore, he was unable to appear. Learned counsel further submits that with regard to the third date, i.e., 2.6.2022, he did not get any intimation and the order impugned has been passed on the ground that the petitioner being habitual in indulging himself in indiscipline and having failed to appear before the concerned committee, has violated the Ordinances of the University meant for maintaining discipline and, hence, the decision has been taken.

4. The submission of Shri Srivastava is that while dealing with the matter, very harsh punishment has been awarded against the petitioner and that too in an ex parte manner. He further submits that no clear role of indiscipline has been assigned in any of the documents forming part of the record and he has been penalized by adopting unwarranted procedure.

5. Per contra, Ms.Mamta Singh has vehemently opposed the writ petition and apart from placing other submissions, she has placed reliance upon a very-very detailed judgment dated 2.12.2019 passed by this Court in the case of the petitioner himself as covered by Writ-C No.25122 of 2019 (Satyam Rai vs. Banaras Hindu University and 5 others). The said case had arisen out of suspension of the petitioner in the year 2017 on account of some other incident of indiscipline. This Court took a lot of pain and arrived at following conclusions and also issued a writ of mandamus to the respondents to execute following directions in the light of the judgment:

"218. The impugned order of suspension dated 27.12.2017 and the consequential order dated 03.07.2019 do not record any past instances of violence or deviant conduct on the part of the petitioner. The petitioner has tendered a contrite apology, to the Court through his counsel, (this is without prejudice to the defence to the petitioner in criminal case), and seeks an opportunity to evolve into a law abiding and responsible citizen of the country.

219. The acts of violence if proved, may warrant disciplinary action to maintain discipline in the campus. But the facts of the case, also require reformative measures to protect the future of the petitioner. However, the suspension of the petitioner cannot continue indefinitely. A regular departmental enquiry against the students has not been concluded till date. The petitioner cannot be deprived of higher education indefinitely.

220. In the wake of the preceding discussion, this Court finds that the order dated 27.12.2017 passed by the respondent no. 4, Assistant Registrar (ACAD), Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi is arbitrary and illegal and of no effect. The order dated 27.12.2017 passed by the respondent no. 4, Assistant Registrar (ACAD), Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi is quashed.

221. The consequential order dated 03.07.2019 passed by the respondent no. 5, Deputy Registrar (Academic), Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, is quashed.

222. The quashment of the impugned order, does not in any manner exonerate the petitioner of his guilt. Nor does it preempt the regular enquiry into the misconduct. The law shall take its course, unhindered by any observation made in this judgement.

223. In the facts of the instant case and the material in the record, the admission of the petitioner in the M.A. course, shall happen in the manner and the time frame provided in the final directions.

224. The issue relating to creation of reform, self development and rehabilitation programmes in the University was heard as a common issue in various writ petitions. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Union of India, New Delhi and the Chairman, University Grants Commission, New Delhi, were also parties in the leading two writ petitions namely Writ C No. 13214 of 2019 (Anant Narayan Mishra Vs. The Union of India and Others) and Writ C No. 26755 of 2019 (Mohammad Ghayas Vs. State of U.P. and Others). All connected writ petitions were heard together.

225. The directions issued to the Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Union of India, New Delhi and the Chairman, University Grants Commission, New Delhi, in the leading two writ petitions; Writ C No. 13214 of 2019 (Anant Narayan Mishra Vs. The Union of India and Others) and Writ C No. 26755 of 2019 (Mohammad Ghayas Vs. State of U.P. and Others) being of a general nature, shall be part of all connected writ petitions including the instant writ petition.

The matter is remitted to the respondents.

226. A writ in the nature of mandamus is issued commanding the respective respondents to execute the following directions in the light of this judgment:

I. The University shall create a reform, self development and rehabilitation programme, for students accused of misconduct and against whom disciplinary action or any action to deny facilities of the university is proposed or taken;

II. The reform, self development and rehabilitation programme should be created after wide consultations and workshops with institutions of higher learning and research, universities, experts, student counsellors/psychologists, psychiatrists, students and other stakeholders;

III. University Grants Commission will aid the above process by providing the necessary support to the University to create, standardize and effectuate the reform, self development and rehabilitation programme in the university;

IV. The Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Government of India, New Delhi, shall also provide the necessary support to create infrastructure in the University to effectuate the reform, self development and rehabilitation programme in the University, in light of this judgment and as per law;

V. The reform, self development and rehabilitation programmes shall be processed as per law, and integrated into the existing legal/statutory framework, of the University dealing with deviant conduct and punishments;

VI. The case of petitioner for admission to M.A. course shall be considered after the creation of the reform, self development and rehabilitation programme;

VII. In case the petitioner is found eligible for admission to M.A. course, he shall be permitted to pursue the M.A. course along with the reform, self development and rehabilitation programme in the University;

VIII. It shall be open to the BHU to impose necessary restraints, as it deems fit, upon the petitioner even as he pursues his academic course along with the reform, self development and rehabilitation programme;

IX. The exercise shall be completed, preferably, within six months, but not later than 12 months. At all times the respondents keeping in mind the best interests of the students and the society, shall make all efforts to expedite the compliance of the directions;

X. It shall be open to the respondents to create a scheme for reform, self development and rehabilitation for convicts in criminal cases who wish to pursue further higher studies in the respondent University;

XI. The counsels for the respondents shall provide certified copy of this judgment along with copy of the judgment of this Court rendered in Writ C No. 13214 of 2019 (Anant Narayan Mishra Vs. The Union of India and Others), to the Vice Chancellor, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi; the Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Union of India, New Delhi and the Chairman, University Grants Commission, New Delhi, for necessary compliances.

227. The writ petition is allowed to the extent and manner indicated above."

6. A perusal of the aforesaid judgment shows that the petitioner was allowed to pursue the M.A. course in case, he was found eligible for admission and it was left open for the B.H.U. to put necessary restraints upon the petitioner during the course of time when he pursues the course.

7. Ms.Mamta Singh has further argued that the petitioner deliberately avoided appearance before the concerned committee and even in proceedings held by the police, when the petitioner was arrested, he submitted a written apology at the police station. Necessary documents in this regard have been shown to the Court as Annexure CA-2.

8. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, insofar as the violation of the principles of natural justice as alleged by the petitioner is concerned, I find that even after 2.6.2022, certain application was filed by the petitioner seeking review of the decision. The said application has also been rejected, but such rejection has not been challenged by the petitioner either in the writ petition or by way of amendment.

9. Nevertheless, the record shows that the petitioner was punished on earlier occasion also and the Court granted indulgence in his favour with certain observations.

10. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon a recent decision of this Court passed on 2.8.2023 in Writ-C No.21339 of 2020 (Prakhar Nagar vs. State of UP and 4 others) and has argued that this Court has found punishment as disproportionate and set aside the same.

11. It is admitted between the parties that the petitioner has cleared his M.A. course and has qualified the NET/JRF examination and is to undergo his Ph.D. The order restraining the petitioner from further pursuing the course appears to be unjustified even if the conduct of the petitioner is found to be full of indiscipline, inasmuch as, this Court in the order dated 2.8.2023 has, after placing reliance upon various decisions, held as follows:

"16. This Court in Anant Narayan Mishra v. The Union of India and 4 others set its face against adoption of solely punitive regime to deal with the indiscipline or aberrant behaviour by the students to the complete exclusion of a reformist approach. Anant Narayan Mishra (supra) directed a composite scheme to deal with matters relating to indiscipline or aberrant behaviour by young scholars wherein a penal system is duly integrated with a reformative approach. The UGC in compliance of the directions of this Court issued appropriate guidelines on 13.04.2023 to all University for creating a scheme for reformation and self development for students accused of misconduct to supplement the penal regime for correcting misconduct."

12. Even, if the Court is inclined to permit the petitioner to undergo his further studies, i.e., Ph.D., it cannot ignore the conduct of the petitioner, which is full of indiscipline right from 2017 till today. The written apologies submitted by the petitioner time and again not only before the University, but also before this Court and also before the police authorities appear to be merely an eye-wash as the petitioner has not mend his behaviour as a disciplined student.

13. I find that restraining the petitioner from studies would adversely affect his career and, therefore, by partly allowing the writ petition and quashing the order impugned dated 8.8.2022 in part only to the extent whereby the petitioner has been restrained to further undergo the studies, a cost of Rs.20,000/- is imposed upon the petitioner, which shall be deposited by him before the Registrar of the University. As soon as the cost is deposited, the University shall allow the petitioner to further pursue his studies. However, he will not be allowed to stay in any hostel of the University and he may take an accommodation outside the premises of the University.

14. The University is free to take any further action against the petitioner in case, any other incident of indiscipline is noted by the University and granting indulgence by this Court in the present writ petition will not come in the way of the University in taking any action based upon any fresh incident.

Advocate List

  • Ajay Kumar Rai

  • Hem Pratap Singh,Mamta Singh

Bench
  • HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KSHITIJ SHAILENDRA
Eq Citations
  • 2023/AHC/166335
  • LQ/AllHC/2023/7841
Head Note

A. Education Law — Universities — Discipline — Indiscipline/Aberrant behaviour — Punishment — Composite scheme for dealing with matters relating to indiscipline or aberrant behaviour by young scholars wherein a penal system is duly integrated with a reformative approach — Held, even if Court is inclined to permit petitioner to undergo his further studies, it cannot ignore conduct of petitioner, which is full of indiscipline right from 2017 till today — Written apologies submitted by petitioner time and again not only before University, but also before Supreme Court and also before police authorities appear to be merely an eye-wash as petitioner has not mend his behaviour as a disciplined student — Hence, held, restraining petitioner from studies would adversely affect his career and, therefore, by partly allowing writ petition and quashing impugned order dt. 8.8.2022 in part only to extent whereby petitioner has been restrained to further undergo studies, a cost of Rs. 20,000 is imposed upon petitioner, which shall be deposited by him before Registrar of University — As soon as cost is deposited, University shall allow petitioner to further pursue his studies — However, he will not be allowed to stay in any hostel of University and he may take an accommodation outside premises of University — University is free to take any further action against petitioner in case, any other incident of indiscipline is noted by University and granting indulgence by Supreme Court in present writ petition will not come in way of University in taking any action based upon any fresh incident — Universities — Banaras Hindu University — BHU Ordinances — Ss. 10(1)(a), 10(1)(b), 10(1)(c) and 10(2) — Composite scheme for dealing with matters relating to indiscipline or aberrant behaviour by young scholars wherein a penal system is duly integrated with a reformative approach — Held, even if Court is inclined to permit petitioner to undergo his further studies, it cannot ignore conduct of petitioner, which is full of indiscipline right from 2017 till today — Written apologies submitted by petitioner time and again not only before University, but also before Supreme Court and also before police authorities appear to be merely an eye-wash as petitioner has not mend his behaviour as a disciplined student — Hence, held, restraining petitioner from studies would adversely affect his career and, therefore, by partly allowing writ petition and quashing impugned order dt. 8.8.2022 in part only to extent whereby petitioner has been restrained to further undergo studies, a cost of Rs. 20,000 is imposed upon petitioner, which shall be deposited by him before Registrar of University — As soon as cost is deposited, University shall allow petitioner to further pursue his studies — However, he will not be allowed to stay in any hostel of University and he may take an accommodation outside premises of University — University is free to take any further action against petitioner in case, any other incident of indiscipline is noted by University and granting indulgence by Supreme Court in present writ petition will not come in way of University in taking any action based upon any fresh incident — Education — Universities — Banaras Hindu University — BHU Ordinances — Ss. 10(1)(a), 10(1)(b), 10(1)(c) and 10(2) — Composite scheme for dealing with matters relating to indiscipline or aberrant behaviour by young scholars wherein a penal system is duly integrated with a reformative approach — Held, even if Court is inclined to permit petitioner to undergo his further studies, it cannot ignore conduct of petitioner, which is full of indiscipline right from 2017 till today — Written apologies submitted by petitioner time and again not only before University, but also before Supreme Court and also before police authorities appear to be merely an eye-wash as petitioner has not mend his behaviour as a disciplined student — Hence, held, restraining petitioner from studies would adversely affect his career and, therefore, by partly allowing writ petition and quashing impugned order dt. 8.8.2022 in part only to extent whereby petitioner has been restrained to further undergo studies, a cost of Rs. 20,000 is imposed upon petitioner, which shall be deposited by him before Registrar of University — As soon as cost is deposited, University shall allow petitioner to further pursue his studies — However, he will not be allowed to stay in any hostel of University and he may take an accommodation outside premises of University — University is free to take any further action against petitioner in case, any other incident of indiscipline is noted by University and granting indulgence by Supreme Court in present writ petition will not come in way of University in taking any action based upon any fresh incident B. Education Law — Universities — Banaras Hindu University — BHU Ordinances — Ss. 10(1)(a), 10(1)(b), 10(1)(c)