Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 2324 (MAD)

N. Hariharan v. Registrar, Pondicherry University

2025-04-28

N.MALA

body2025
ORDER : N.MALA, J. 1. This writ petition is filed to call for the entire records in respect of the communication passed by the 2 nd respondent, dated 04.12.2024, to quash the same and consequently direct the 2 nd respondent to allow the petitioner to attend the class 2 nd year B.Tech CSEBS Course. 2. The summary of the facts relevant for adjudicating the issue involved in this case are as follows: The petitioner who was a student of Sri Manakula Vinayagar Engineering College, pursuing 2 nd year CSEBS Course, was placed under suspension on 30.07.2024, for certain indisciplinary activities, for violation of Rules and Regulations of the Institution and for spoiling the reputation of the Institution. Preliminary enquiry was conducted and the petitioner's parents appeared in the enquiry. According to the petitioner in the guise of the enquiry, the Enquiry Committee including the Principal of the College, harassed, tortured and humiliated the petitioner and his parents apart from depriving them of an opportunity of hearing. The petitioner stated that the whole allegation was that one Tamil Oli, belonging to Second year of Information Technology Course, in CSBS Department, shared some personal photos of one Jaya Saro, the classmate of the petitioner, with the other students of the Institution, and that the petitioner in turn forwarded the photos to others including those outside the college. According to the petitioner one Sanjay, who was his classmate, accessed the petitioner's phone and himself sent the photographs of Jaya Saro to other classmates. The petitioner states that he was in no way connected with the incident, but the college authorities selectively passed the order of suspension against him. Under these circumstances, on 11.09.2024, petitioner sent a detailed representation to the respondents requesting them to revoke the suspension order. As the petitioner's representation was not considered, the petitioner filed a Writ Petition in W.P.No.28857 of 2024, seeking to quash the suspension order and allowing him to attend the classes. This Court vide order dated 28.10.2024, recorded the statement of the 2 nd respondent that the suspension order of the petitioner would be revoked and that enquiry would be conducted on the person who committed the mischief and disposed the writ petition. In pursuance of the said order of this Court the second respondent revoked the suspension order of the petitioner and called him for an enquiry that was to be conducted on 16.11.2024. In pursuance of the said order of this Court the second respondent revoked the suspension order of the petitioner and called him for an enquiry that was to be conducted on 16.11.2024. According to the petitioner on the day of the enquiry, the petitioner was compelled to admit the misconduct on threat of interdicting him from attending the college and also reducing his internal marks, the petitioner therefore admitted his guilt. Thereafter on 04.12.2024, the second respondent issued the impugned communication. Aggrieved by the said communication, the petitioner filed the above writ petition for the aforesaid relief. 3. The respondents in their counter affidavit denied all the allegations and contentions raised by the petitioner. The respondent's stated that the writ petition deserved to be dismissed in limine as the petitioner suppressed vital facts and approached the court with unclean hands. The respondents stated that the petitioner had earlier filed a Writ Petition in W.P.No.28857 of 2024, challenging the suspension order and in the course of the hearing of the said case, the Court instructed Advocate, Mrs.A.V. Bharathi, to verify the materials and submit a factual report, on whether the photographs shared by the petitioner were obscene. The learned Advocate submitted her report to the Court stating that the photos shared were obscene. The respondents further stated that in pursuance of the order of this Court dated 28.10.2024, enquiry was conducted and the Enquiry Committee on the basis of the statement given by the students, the telephonic conversation of the petitioner with the other students, the photos shared by the petitioner with the other students, and all other relevant materials submitted a detailed report to the College Administration stating that the petitioner was guilty of the misconduct and further recommended the College to take necessary action against him. Upon perusal of the enquiry report, the impugned communication was issued to the petitioner. The respondents further stated that the respondents were not to be blamed for the petitioner's lack of attendance since it was because of his adamant attitude and his abscondence after 24.07.2024. The respondents stated that the issue was very sensitive as it involved moral turpitude and career of the students. In the interest of the petitioner's future and the request made by the petitioner's parents, the petitioner was permitted to continue his course by re-joining in the second year (i.e) during the academic year 2025-2026. The respondents stated that the issue was very sensitive as it involved moral turpitude and career of the students. In the interest of the petitioner's future and the request made by the petitioner's parents, the petitioner was permitted to continue his course by re-joining in the second year (i.e) during the academic year 2025-2026. The respondents further stated that there were absolutely no merits in the writ petition and the same deserved to be dismissed. 4. I have heard both the learned counsels and I have perused the materials placed on record. 5. The petitioner was placed under suspension for sharing certain private pictures of his classmate with the students both inside and outside of the College. The petitioner challenged the suspension order in W.P.No.28857 of 2024, and during the pendency of the above said writ petition, this Court instructed the learned Advocate Mrs.A.V.Bharathi, to verify the materials and submit a factual report on whether the photos shared were obscene. The learned Advocate submitted a report affirming that the photos shared by the petitioner were obscene. The said facts are totally suppressed by the petitioner in his affidavit and therefore as rightly contended by the learned counsel for the respondents, the writ petition can be rejected at the threshold for suppression of facts. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner relied on a letter given by the affected student, annexed in the type set of papers and submitted that the victim herself exonerated him of the misconduct. It is pertinent to note here that the said letter was considered in the earlier writ petition also. The learned Advocate, Mrs.A.V.Bharathi, in her report categorically stated that the College officials produced the original letter given by the victim and on verification of the petitioner's letter with the original letter it was found that the letter produced by the petitioner was in variation with the original letter produced by the college. In my view therefore the said letter cannot aid the petitioner in any way. The petitioner has blamed the respondents for his lack of attendance stating that the respondents prevented him from attending classes. It is pertinent to note here that soon after the petitioner's suspension, the petitioner went absconding from 24.07.2024, and in this regard a complaint was also registered by the police. The petitioner has blamed the respondents for his lack of attendance stating that the respondents prevented him from attending classes. It is pertinent to note here that soon after the petitioner's suspension, the petitioner went absconding from 24.07.2024, and in this regard a complaint was also registered by the police. The respondents stated that the petitioner did not attend the Institution even after the disposal of the earlier writ petition and these facts are not denied by the petitioner and therefore, the contention of the petitioner that he was prevented from attending classes by the respondents cannot be endorsed. 7. In pursuance of the order of this Court suspension of the petitioner was revoked and an Enquiry Committee was constituted. The Enquiry Committee on the basis of the statement of the other students, the telephonic conversation of the petitioner with the other students, the photos shared by the petitioner with the other students and all other relevant materials concluded that the petitioner was guilty of the misconduct. The Enquiry Committee on the basis of its findings recommended that any one of the three actions suggested by them could be imposed on the petitioner. The three actions suggested by the Enquiry Committee are as follows: With a warning he may be advised to pursue his course in some other institution after withdrawing from our institution. 2. With a severe warning, he may be permitted to rejoin in our institution in the next academic year 2025-26. 3. Since he has indulged in a serious crime, he may be dismissed from the institution forthwith. It is seen that notwithstanding the licentious conduct of the petitioner, it appears that the college has adopted a notably tolerant stance in dealing with him. It is seen that the 2 nd respondent magnanimously chose the second option in the interest of the petitioner's future/career. Ergo, I find absolutely no justifiable reasons for interfering with the impugned communication. 8. In view of the above discussions, I find no merits in the writ petition and hence the same is dismissed. 9. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.