Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 252 (ALL)

Afaq Ahmad v. Aligarh Muslim University,Aligarh

2017-01-18

DILIP B.BHOSALE, YASHWANT VARMA

body2017
JUDGMENT Heard Mr. Araf Khan, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Shashi Nandan, learned Senior Advocate with Mr. Iqram Ahmad, learned Advocate for the University and Mr. Atma Prasad Tripathi, learned counsel for the respondent no. 5. The special appeal arises from the order dated 16.12.2016 passed by learned Single Judge on Recall Application No. 378057 of 2016 in Writ ? C No. 47595 of 2016, whereby order dated 28.11.2016, disposing of the writ petition, has been recalled. The order dated 28.11.2016 passed in the writ petition reads thus: ?This petition is directed against the office memos dated 27.7.2016, 9.8.2016 and 22.8.2016. A further prayer has been made to restore petitioner's possession and belongings in Room No. 51, Jubilee Hostel, V.M. Hall, Aligarh Muslim University. This matter was heard on 24.11.2016 and 25.11.2016. During the course of hearing, various submissions were made, and this Court also proceeded to make observations which may avoid any unpleasant course for either of the parties. The matter was deferred. Learned counsel for the petitioner, on the basis of specific instructions obtained from his client states that petitioner shall comply with the directions of the University to shift to other hostel i.e. Sir Syed Hall. Learned counsel for the University states that in such view of the matter, University will have no objection in returning petitioner's belongings and in allotting accommodation to the petitioner in terms of the directions previously issued on 27th July, 2016. Writ petition is, accordingly disposed off. In view of the aforesaid situation, orders under challenge in so far as it proceeds to castigate petitioner or inflict any punishment shall stand deleted from the records.? It appears that even after this order, the appellant continued to perpetuate indiscipline in the campus of the University affecting the academic atmosphere. An application for recall of the order dated 28.11.2016 was filed on which learned Single Judge on 16.12.2016 passed the following order: ?This petition was disposed off by this Court on 28.11.2016. An application for recall of this order has been filed with the allegation that petitioner has continued to perpetrate indiscipline in the campus, which is affecting the academic atmosphere itself. This matter was heard in the chamber on 15.12.2016 and certain video clips were also produced. An application for recall of this order has been filed with the allegation that petitioner has continued to perpetrate indiscipline in the campus, which is affecting the academic atmosphere itself. This matter was heard in the chamber on 15.12.2016 and certain video clips were also produced. Today, a letter dated 3.12.2016 addressed to the District Magistrate, Aligarh, has been placed before this Court, according to which petitioner has made a prayer to initiate criminal action against the authorities of the university alleging that human rights are being violated. It is also mentioned that authorities of the university were involved in an act of dacoity, by taking away belongings of the petitioner. This letter of the petitioner is taken on record. Discipline in an educational institution is of paramount concern, and its absence would lead to fall in academic atmosphere of the institution. Allegations and counter allegations are made by the petitioner and authorities of the university. In such view of the matter, I am of the opinion that this is not a fit case for exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Application for recall accordingly stands allowed. The order dated 28.11.2016 is recalled and the writ petition is dismissed. Parties are left open to pursue their remedy in accordance with law.? Despite these orders, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the University, on instructions in order to give one more opportunity to the appellant, submits that the respondent-University is prepared to accommodate him in some other hostel provided he files an undertaking in this Court stating that he will not indulge in any activity affecting the academic atmosphere within the campus of the University. Counsel for the appellant invited our attention to an affidavit, which was filed in reply to the recall application, and in particular paragraph 4 thereof, and submits that such an undertaking has already been given by the appellant. We are not satisfied with the undertaking as has been given in the said affidavit. Counsel for the appellant invited our attention to an affidavit, which was filed in reply to the recall application, and in particular paragraph 4 thereof, and submits that such an undertaking has already been given by the appellant. We are not satisfied with the undertaking as has been given in the said affidavit. We, therefore, direct the appellant to file a separate affidavit requesting the University to accommodate him in some other hostel unconditionally and also stating that he shall neither participate nor indulge in any activity, affecting the academic atmosphere within the campus of the University and he will not have any objection for action being taken against him, including debarring him from the University, if it is found that he is indulging in or perpetuating indiscipline in the campus. On such an undertaking being filed before this Court within a period of one week from today with an advance copy thereof to the counsel for the University, the University may accommodate him in any one of the hostels within the campus of the University immediately thereafter. If any such undertaking is filed, the same shall stand accepted by this Court. It is needless to mention that the respondent-University may bring it to the notice of the Court, if such an undertaking is not filed in terms of this order. With these observations, the appeal is disposed of.