ORDER The petitioner has filed this writ petition, seeking to quash the impugned order dated 15.10.2014 issued by the 1st respondent, in and by which, the petitioner was dismissed from the college. 2. The case of the petitioner in nutshell is as under: i) The petitioner joined B.Sc. in Maritime Hospitality in the 1st respondent college for the year 2012-2015 and that he has completed 4th semester. He has secured good marks in the 1st semester and has been maintaining good character all along. He has also paid final year fee also cleared all the papers upto 4th semester. ii) The petitioner has submitted that while so, the 1st respondent issued an order of suspension dated 11.09.2014 alleging that he had involved in ragging and that he was not allowed to attend the classes. In the meantime, the 1st respondent, vide letter dated 15.09.2014, directed the petitioner to appear for enquiry on 25.09.2014 and again on 04.10.2014, it was communicated to him to attend the enquiry with parents, pursuant to which, he also attended the enquiry along with his parents and stated that he had not involved in ragging. It is submitted that the 1st respondent had not formed a disciplinary committee before issuing the order of suspension and no particulars had been given to know under what basis, complaint and petition, such an enquiry has been initiated against him. iii) The petitioner has further submitted that even though he has not committed any mistake, he was forced to tender his apology and he also tendered his apology on the premise that he would be allowed to continue his studies without any interruption. But on the contrary, the 1st respondent passed the impugned order of dismissal on 15.10.2014 without even giving him an opportunity to defend himself, which is against the Regulations of the University to the effect that a Discipline and Welfare Committee has to be formed to decide such issues. It is stated that the allegations against him are very flimsy and are levelled with the sole intention of not allowing him for the 5th semester examinations. iv) The submission of the petitioner is that the impugned order is highlly arbitrary, illegal and violative of doctrine of equality and the same was issued without any base and appreciating any evidence and he was not given any chance to prove his innocence. iv) The submission of the petitioner is that the impugned order is highlly arbitrary, illegal and violative of doctrine of equality and the same was issued without any base and appreciating any evidence and he was not given any chance to prove his innocence. If he is not allowed to continue his final year study, he will not be in a position to submit his project work on time. Therefore, it is prayed that the impugned order is liable to be set aside. 3. The 1st respondent has filed a counter, wherein it has been inter alia stated as follows: i) The Subbalakshmi Lakshmipathy Science College, Madurai (hereinafter referred to as ‘the college’) is owned and administered by, Subbalakshmi Lakshmipathy Foundation. The Foundation is a charitable Trust incorporated under section 25 of the Companies Act, 1956. The certificate of incorporation has been issued by the Registrar of Companies, Tamil Nadu - No. 18 – 18186 of 1989. The main objects of the Foundation include medical relief to the poor, establishment of hospitals, clinics and dispensaries, to establish and maintain institutions providing education at all levels, to provide accommodation and lodging to the poor and the deserving and to give them facilities to carry on with their studies in a congenial atmosphere. The Foundation is administered by the Board of Directors. The Foundation has established 4 [four] Educational Institutions as below: (1) R L Institute of Nautical Sciences (2) Subbalakshmi Lakshmipathy College of Science (3) R L Institute of Management Studies (4) Krishnamal Ramasubbaiyer Marticulation School ii) It is stated that the College was established in the year 1994. It is a self-financed college. Admission to the college is kept open for all eligible candidates irrespective of caste, creed, religion or language. Preference is however given to the poor and the backward classes without compromising the merit. Education is offered on charitable basis. The College is affiliated to the Madurai Kamaraj University. It was accredited with 4 Star Status in the year 2000 by the NAAC [National Assessment and Accreditation Council]. Now the NAAC has re-accredited the college with B++ Status in 2007. The Madurai Kamaraj University has conferred Autonomous status from 2006 – 2007 to 2011 – 2012 in Ref. No. CDC.5/SLC-Autonomous Status/2006 dated 15.03.2006. There are 634 students now studying in the college and there are 35 teaching staff and 25 non-teaching staff in the college. Now the NAAC has re-accredited the college with B++ Status in 2007. The Madurai Kamaraj University has conferred Autonomous status from 2006 – 2007 to 2011 – 2012 in Ref. No. CDC.5/SLC-Autonomous Status/2006 dated 15.03.2006. There are 634 students now studying in the college and there are 35 teaching staff and 25 non-teaching staff in the college. The College is doing a yeomen service in the field of education, particularly for the benefit of the society especially of socially and educationally backward communities of the State. Many first generation students are studying in the institutions. iii) It is further stated that the college is maintaining high discipline on the students. The college is giving the best protection to the students and preventing the senior students from ragging the juniors. The separate Committee has been formed by the College namely, Disciplinary Committee to enquire into any kinds of students' disputes including ragging. Any kinds of complaints regarding the students will be enquired by this committee by providing reasonable opportunity of hearing. The committee comprised of following members; 1. Dr. A. Padmanabhan, Principal of Subbalakshmi Lakshmipathy College of Science 2. Mr. Subramanian – Principal of R.L. Institute of Nautical Science 3. Dr. G.R. Balakrishnan – Advisor of Subbalakshmi Lakshmipathy Foundation 4. Mr. R.S. Vetrivel – Vice-Principal of Subbalakshmi Lakshmipathy College of Science 5. Mr. Suresh Kumar – Head of the Department of B.Sc., MHS 6. Mr. J. Krishnamurthy – Executive Assistant to President of Subbalakshmi Lakshmipathy Foundation iv) It is also stated that as far as the petitioner herein is concerned, he joined B.Sc. - Maritime Hospitality Studies (MHS) course in the college in the academic year 2012-2013. The duration of course is 3 years. When the petitioner was in the 2nd year of his study, the college received complaints from the then 1st year B.Sc. (MHS) students (now in 2nd year) alleging that the petitioner had involved in ragging. The College conducted an enquiry and found the petitioner guilty of ragging the 1st year students. The petitioner accepted his guilt by his letter dated 08.08.2013 and pleaded for forgiveness by assuring that he would not involve in such kind of activities in future. After bringing this to the knowledge of his parents, the College took a sympathetic view and permitted him to continue his course. The petitioner accepted his guilt by his letter dated 08.08.2013 and pleaded for forgiveness by assuring that he would not involve in such kind of activities in future. After bringing this to the knowledge of his parents, the College took a sympathetic view and permitted him to continue his course. In the current academic year (2014-2015), a few first year students suddenly discontinued their studies from the college. When the college made enquiries for the reason in the first week of September 2014, the Head of the Department of B.Sc. (MHS) brought to the notice that the first year students were reporting about the involvement of a few senior students in ragging that was the reason why the students left. v) The stand taken in the counter is that in the course of the preliminary enquiry, the 1st year students gave written complaints on 09.09.2014, 10.09.2014 and 11.09.2014. On perusal, 11 senior students were reported to have involved in the mischief. The college enquired those 11 students and found them guilty of same. The college suspended all the 11 students immediately on 11.09.2014, pending detailed enquiry into the matter. The names of the eleven students suspended are as follows: 1. V. Jobin David - III year MHS (petitioner) 2. Rajapandiyan - III year MHS 3. M. Mohammed Thaha Rafi - II year MHS 4. V. Vinoth Kumar - III year MHS 5. G. Arun Vignesh - III year MHS 6. R. Arun Kumar - III year MHS 7. P. Balamurugan - II year MHS 8. T.S. Karthic Kumar - II year MHS 9. M. Daneshwaran - III year MHS 10. G. Uthandamani - III year MHS 11. R. Narayanan - III year MHS On the same day, yet another student of IIIrd year MHS K. Anand had ragged a 1st year student B. Ravi Shankar (MHS) for the reason that he had given complaints of ragging against his classmates. The college enquired into the matter and found Mr. K. Anand guilty and suspended him immediately on 12.09.2014. Fearing the incident, the said 1st year student B. Ravi Shankar left the college and discontinued the course. vi) The further stand of the respondent college is that all the suspended senior students were asked to vacate the Hostel immediately in the interest of the fresher. K. Anand guilty and suspended him immediately on 12.09.2014. Fearing the incident, the said 1st year student B. Ravi Shankar left the college and discontinued the course. vi) The further stand of the respondent college is that all the suspended senior students were asked to vacate the Hostel immediately in the interest of the fresher. The matter was placed before the Disciplinary Committee for enquiry and 10 charges were framed against the petitioner. The college decided to conduct enquiry on various dates starting from 19.09.2014 to 30.09.2014 for each students and intimated the same to the petitioner and other students through Registered Post on 15.09.2014. For petitioner the enquiry date was fixed as 25.09.2014 and on the said date, the petitioner attended the enquiry along with his mother. As it was found it appropriate to conduct the enquiry in the presence of his father, he was advised to come along with his father. Except 3 students (including the petitioner), the Committee conducted enquiry for all the other 9 students on or before 26.09.2014 itself. The college informed the petitioner to appear for enquiry before the Committee on 10.10.2014 along with his father by letter dated 04.10.2014. The petitioner appeared with his father. All the charges and the contents of the complaints were read out to him and to his father. The petitioner was asked to submit his explanation. Of the 10 charges, he admitted one in writing that he had asked the freshers to clean the kitchen. He further admitted that the 1st year students were asked parade and to salute the seniors. The petitioner and his father asked for pardon. vii) The Disciplinary Committee considered the matter carefully along with the circular issued by the Director of Collegiate Education in Letter No. 2857/A2/07-1 dated 14.03.2007. The Committee found the allegations true and that the petitioner was leading the activities of ragging. The Committee recommended for dispelling petitioner and 2 other students from the college. It recommended minor punishments for the remaining 9 students. The college, by letter dated 15.10.2014, informed the petitioner that as per the Report of the Disciplinary Committee, he had been dispelled from the college and instructed him to collect the Transfer Certificate. The petitioner did not turn up. The college sent the Transfer Certificate to him through Registered Post on 06.11.2014. It was returned to the college as he had refused to receive it. The petitioner did not turn up. The college sent the Transfer Certificate to him through Registered Post on 06.11.2014. It was returned to the college as he had refused to receive it. However, the petitioner had signed the acknowledgment card. The Transfer Certificates of other two students were also sent through Registered Post and they have received the same. viii) In the counter, the averment made by the petitioner that the impugned order was passed without disciplinary and welfare committee is denied and the same was passed after due enquiry by the Disciplinary Committee and after providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. It is stated that the petitioner also had bad antecedent of ragging junior students and at that time, the College took a sympathetic view and permitted him to continue his course. Therefore, it is prayed that the writ petition lacks merits and is liable to be dismissed. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the impugned order has been passed in mechanical manner without conducting proper enquiry and unless or otherwise, it is set aside, the future career and education of the petitioner will be in bleak. He has further submitted that before issuance of dismissal order, there was no constitution of Discipline and Welfare Committee as required under the Madurai Kamaraj University Act. 5. On the contrary, learned counsel for the 1st respondent has vehemently contended that pursuant to several complaints of ragging levelled against the petitioner, which were received from the newly admitted students, after forming a committee to enquire into the same, the order of dismissal came to be passed by them. On earlier occasion also, the petitioner involved in such activities and at that time, he was only warned by the college and was permitted to continue his studies. He has further submitted that due to the act of the petitioner, the name and fame of the college has become deteriorated, which resulted in discontinuation of a number of students from the college. On enquiry, it came to light that the first year students were ragged by the senior students and in order to maintain a high dignity and standard of the college, the college was constrained to take such a decision of expulsion of the petitioner from the college, which, therefore, does not warrant any interference by this Court. 6. On enquiry, it came to light that the first year students were ragged by the senior students and in order to maintain a high dignity and standard of the college, the college was constrained to take such a decision of expulsion of the petitioner from the college, which, therefore, does not warrant any interference by this Court. 6. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the material documents available on record. 7. It is seen that the petitioner, though meritorious, is mischievous also, because of his involvement in ragging junior students, which is the root cause for his expulsion from the college. Before deciding the issue, it is worthwhile to refer to the provisions of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Ragging Act, 1997, which read as under: “4) Penalty of ragging: Whoever directly or indirectly commits, participates in, abets or propagates “ragging” within or without any educational institution, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years and shall also be liable to a fine which may extend to ten thousand rupees. 5) Dismissal of Student: Any student convicted of an offence under Section 4 shall be dismissed from the educational institution and such student shall not be admitted in any other educational institution.” 8. Ragging not only affects students, who are involved but also the family members of the students, being ragged as also the family members of the persons, ragging other students and the Society at large, as a consequence of which, the name of the institution will definitely get spoiled and other parents will not dare to admit their sons or daughters in those institutions. 9. On realizing the mood of the Court, the petitioner has immediately represented that he has got sufficient attendance to take up the examinations and that he may be permitted to take up the course in some other college affiliated to the Madurai Kamaraj University so that his future will not be spoiled. 9. On realizing the mood of the Court, the petitioner has immediately represented that he has got sufficient attendance to take up the examinations and that he may be permitted to take up the course in some other college affiliated to the Madurai Kamaraj University so that his future will not be spoiled. Though initially this Court was not inclined to adhere to such request, as the ragging is construed as a social menace, taking note of the pubescent age of the petitioner, a question was posed to the learned counsel for the University as to the possibility of the petitioner being allowed to take up the 5th semester examinations pursuant to his full attendance and as to whether any attendance is required for the 6th semester. Though the University was reluctant at the first instance, subsequently, it has agreed to accommodate the petitioner / student in some other college. However, later on, it came to light that none of the college affiliated to the said University has got similar course, which the petitioner has undertaken till the 5th semester. Finally, it was stated that the petitioner will be permitted to take up the examination in the centre prescribed for the 1st respondent college, but as far as completition of his project work is concerned, he could select a hotel of his choice for his project. 10. The petitioner has filed an affidavit dated 13.07.2015 stating that he has got 70% attendance for the 5th semester and if he is given an opportunity to complete his B.Sc. Degree with good remark under the 1st respondent college syllabus, he would be loyal and truthful in conduct to the esteemed educational institution. 11. The 1st respondent has filed an affidavit dated 13.07.2105 before this Court by duly stating that the representation of the petitioner was received on 10.07.2015, requesting to permit him to write the 5th semester examination in the Madurai Kamaraj University and also to permit him to submit his project report and attend viva-voce throug the very same University. It is further stated in the affidavit of the 1st respondent that the issue with regard to the ragging has to be decided and the College would take steps to permit the petitioner to take his 5th semester examination in Madurai Kamaraj University by preparing question papers of its own. It is further stated in the affidavit of the 1st respondent that the issue with regard to the ragging has to be decided and the College would take steps to permit the petitioner to take his 5th semester examination in Madurai Kamaraj University by preparing question papers of its own. For commencement of 6th semester, on the petitioner proposing the intending hotel to do his project work, the college would recommend for the same and after his completion of project work, he may submit the same and do his viva voce through the University for award of his degree. However, the 1st respondent college has stated that such permission is without prejudice to the stand taken by them in the counter. 12. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of R.M.Parkar vs. Gujarat Electricity Board, reported in (1982) 1 GLR 352 has held as under: “(1) In a disciplinary proceeding for an alleged fault of an employee punishment is imposed not in order to seek retribution or to give vent to feeling of wrath. (2) The main purpose of a punishment is to correct the fault of the employee concerned by making him more alert in the future and to hold out a warning to the other employees to be careful in the discharge of their duties so that they do not expose themselves to similar punishment. And the approach to be made is the approach parents make towards an erring or misguided child. (3) It is not expedient in the interest of the administration to visit every employee against whom a fault is established with the penalty of dismissal and to get rid of them. It would be counter productive to do so for it would be futile to expect to recruit employees who are so perfect that they would never commit any fault.” 13. Though the above judgment has been rendered by the Gujarat High Court in respect of a dispute between the employees and the employer, the message, being conveyed in the said judgment is that once a person repents for his mistake, that too committed in adolesent age, forgiveness is the best medicine, as the same is the intentional and voluntary process by which a victim undergoes a change in feelings and attitude regarding an offense, lets go of negative emotions such as vengefulness, with an increased ability to wish the offender well. The main purpose of a punishment is to correct the fault of the person concerned by making him more alert in the future and to hold out a warning to the other employees to be careful in the discharge of their duties so that they do not expose themselves to similar punishment. 14. Taking into account the submissions made on either side, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions: i) The 1st respondent shall take steps to permit the petitioner to take his 5th Semester Examination in Madurai Kamaraj University by preparing question papers of its own; ii) Insofar as the 6th semester is concerned, since there is only internship programme for a period of 4 months as stated by the College, the petitioner is directed to inform the College about the hotel of his choice in which he is intending to do his project and on receipt of such information from the petitioner, the college shall recommend for the same; iii) The petitioner, on successful completion of his project work, shall submit his Project Report and participate in the viva-voce through the University for obtaining his Degree. 15. However, it is made clear the above order shall not be taken as a precedent for other students to knock at the doors of this Court seeking similar request, more particularly the students studying in the professional courses like M.B.B.S., B.L., as now-a-days, law college students also take part in the boycotting being conducted by Advocates. This order has been passed based on the affidavit filed by the 1st respondent college consenting to such arrangements in order to safeguard the interest of its student / petitioner. Otherwise, there may be a disavowal by this Court in granting the relief to the petitioner. 16. Before concluding the judgment, this Court would like to give some piece of advice to the students like the petitioner. According to Chanakya, the fragrance of flowers spreads only in the direction of the wind. But the goodness of a person spreads in all directions. At the end of every light, is a tunnel of darkness and those, who learnt to come out like twinkling stars, will be the successful in life. A stable weather is a gift, you can enjoy the pink life; a stormy weather is a gift, you can learn the real life! At the end of every light, is a tunnel of darkness and those, who learnt to come out like twinkling stars, will be the successful in life. A stable weather is a gift, you can enjoy the pink life; a stormy weather is a gift, you can learn the real life! Likewise, both the good and the bad are gifts to know the reality of life. In this case, since the petitioner has undergone turmoil, this Court expects him to bury his bitter past and start leading a disciplined life, by utilizing the opportunity fully, as he should always remember that opportunity knocks at the door only once. Swami Vivekananda in his message said that “Unfortunately in this life, the vast majority of persons are groping through this dark life without any ideal at all. If a man with an ideal makes a thousand mistakes, I am sure that the man without an ideal makes fifty thousand. Therefore, it is better to have an ideal.” No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.