AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
P. Shanmugam, J.—All these writ petitions are challenging a common order passed by the Principal of the Government Arts College (Autonomous). Coimbatore dismissing the Petitioners and issuing the Transfer Certificates to them. Petitioners in W.P. Nos. 13956 and 14232 of 1999 belong to III Year B.A. Political Science, however from different classes, one in English Medium and the other in Tamil Medium.
The case against the Petitioners is that they had indulged in ragging the I Year students and assaulted another student one A. Ganesan on 5.7.1999. The said fact was witnessed by two Professors S. Tamilmani of Commerce Department and G.S. Durai of Sanskrit Department. The said Ganesan gave a complaint in writing, counter signed by 43 students of the college who were present at that time. In the said complaint, he has stated mat while he was going out of the class, the Petitioners Lakshmanan and Rajesh picked up a quarrel under the influence of liquor and assaulted him. Hence, he requested that action may be taken against them. Both the professors have explained the incident directly to the Principal, The injured student Ganesan was found suffering from pain due to the assault made by the Petitioners. Therefore, the Principal immediately asked the Head of Department of the Political Science Thiru Prof. K. Mohd. Razzaq to enquire into the matter. Thiru Prof. K. Mohd. Razzaq enquired the injured student as well as the other students who were witness to the incident. Those who have seen the incident have signed the statement. Thiru Prof. K. Mohd. Razzaq reported after a due enquiry that Ganesan was assaulted and serious injuries have been caused to the said student. Thereafter, a decision was taken by the College Council after a long deliberation to issue Transfer Certificates to the Petitioners. However on 9.8.99, the complaint given by the Ganesan counter signed by 43 students was withdrawn and by a separate letter, it was requested that no action need be taken. The writ petition is filed against the order of dismissal and the issue of Transfer Certificates.
The other two writ Petitioners Abuthahir and Sabir were also dismissed from the college by the Principal in reference to a different incident where the Petitioners were involved in ragging and abusing girl students and causing disturbance to the conduct and functioning of the History Department. About 10 girl students gave a written complaint to the Head of Department of History alleging that two students entered into their class unauthorisedly and asked all the girls to tell their names and where from they were coming. They directed the girls to salute the boys and those girls who did not respond were abused with filthy language and therefore they sought for strict action. On 7.7.99, the Head of Department also submitted a report to the Principal stating that during the second hour, he found that the third and fourth Petitioners were ragging the students and causing disturbance to the conduct and functioning of the History Department and requested to initiate suitable action. It is stated in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Respondent that the Petitioners Abuthahir and Sabir were taken to the college office and were identified by the girl students.
It is also not disputed that the College Council consisting of 19 professors took a decision in the meeting held on 9.7.99. According to the decision, it is seen that all the professors were of the uniform opinion that four students were indulging in ragging and it was considered in a lengthy deliberation as to their conduct and ultimately it was decided to dismiss them and to issue their Transfer Certificates to the University. The writ petitions are filed against this order.
In continuation of the fact, it is further seen that the college students went on a strike insisting that the students who were dismissed should be re-admitted from 12.7.99 onwards. The students also compelled those students who went to the classes to go out of the classes. They also prevented the classes from being conducted on 21.7.99, 22.7.99 and 23.7.99. In the light of the subsequent developments and the directions issued by the District Collector and other authorities, the parents concerned were said to have been informed to receive the Transfer Certificates of their wards from the University for considering about their re-admission, if possible. However, the students did not avail of this opportunity.
The main contention of the learned Counsel for the Petitioners is that the impugned order violates the principles of natural justice, in that no notice was given and enquiry was conducted before dismissing the Petitioners from the college. Hence, the question that arises now is whether the summary dismissal of the Petitioners without following the normal rule of issuing notice and enquiry is sustainable or not.
In this context, it is seen that the Bharathiar University, in their communication dated 29.6.99, in order to prevent ragging, issued a circular based on the circular issued by the Secretary General, Association of Indian Universities, New Delhi. The Ministry of Human Resources, New Delhi also requested to take suitable action. One of the suggested steps for fighting "ragging" in educational institutions was that ragging in any form, inside or outside the campus, should be banned. The senior students found indulging in ragging junior students should be summarily expelled from the University/Institution. The heads of the institutions were directed to write before the commencement of the colleges to the parents of the students in senior classes informing them of the possible consequences of ragging and requesting them to prevent their wards for indulging in ragging. The copy of the letter from the Ministry of Human Resources dated 7.6.99 was enclosed, wherein it is stated that the Honourable Supreme Court in W.P. (Civil) 656/99, taking note of the menace of ragging in educational institutions all over India, directed that the institutions should be issued with the circular immediately to take immediate steps and to report follow-up. The Honourable Court further directed that information from all universities and technical institutions be obtained on the steps being taken by them, if any, in connection with the prevention of ragging and reported. The university also has written a letter on 28.7.98 informing that the Government also is concerned about the practice of ragging. The said practice is totally alien to our culture. In the name of this fashionable practice, senior students not only/bully the new entrants for several weeks into doing odd jobs for them, but also indulge in many indecent and brutal acts which often cause physical and mental torture to the new students. There were reports of suicides committed consequent on the ragging. The university directed the authorities to eliminate the practice of ragging taking serious consideration to implement the measures. It is seen that in pursuance to these directions, the Petitioners have given an undertaking from their parents in the beginning of July 1997 when they were admitted that their wards will not indulge in any indecent activities and if any such act is committed, they are agreeable for taking the transfer certificate and removal from the college. They also assured that the students will not interfere with any indecent activities. The declaration also states as follows:
I am aware that ''ragging'' is prohibited in educational institutions in the State of Tamil Nadu Act 7 of 1997. I know that if any student commits, participates or abets or propagates ragging, he shall be punished with:
(i) imprisonment for a term of two years and
(ii) fine of Rs. l0,000/- I am fully aware that if any student is convicted of an offence on the above act u/s 4, he shall be dismissed from the educational institution.
From the above, it is clear that if the students are found indulging in ragging, they are liable to be summarily dismissed from the college. There is no question of enquiry and notice in such cases of ragging. In this case, the three Professors have given a written complaint and ten girl students have given a complaint and one Ganesan, counter signed by 43 students, have given a complaint against the Petitioners for ragging. This has been placed before the College Council who have decided to dismiss the Petitioners and issue their Transfer Certificates. The Petitioners and other students instigated to boycott the college for several days and on the advice of the revenue authorities, the parents were instructed to bring the Transfer Certificates of the Petitioners for re-admission, but they have failed to avail of that opportunity. Even now, when suggestion was given to the students that they may be issued with the Transfer Certificate without being an order of dismissal and a stigma attached to them, they are not prepared to take that suggestion. On the contrary, they insist that they must be admitted to the college. Considering the facts and circumstances, if the students are permitted to continue in the college, it will only further aggravate the in discipline in the college, especially the menace of ragging.
Justice Srinivasan (as he then was), in Leo Francis Xaviour Vs. The Principal, Karunya Institute of Technology, Coimbatore and another, , held that ragging is a barbarious practice and it should be totally banned. If any body is found guilty of ragging, he shall be immediately expelled from the institution and especially debarred from entering any other institution thereafter. The learned Judge suggested that it is high time that a legislation was passed by the legislature in Tamil Nadu and hoped that the Government would take note of the situation and take steps to bring about the legislation. Now, the Act has come into existence. But still, the practice of ragging is existing in several educational institutions. The learned Judge held that in the absence of any specific allegation which could indicate mala fide on the part of the Respondent, there is no justification to entertain the argument about the enquiry committee. In this case also, it cannot be stated that there was no enquiry at all. Petitioner was enquired into and a report was submitted by the Professors and a decision was taken by the college Council consisting of all the Professors of the College. It has to be seen that the college is an autonomous college and they have decided that the Petitioners indulged in serious offence of ragging.
I have gone through the files which were placed before me as to the conduct of the enquiry and I am satisfied that the authorities have come to the conclusion based on the evidence that the Petitioners were involved in ragging. In the light of this finding and the instructions that persons involved in ragging should be summarily expelled from the University, as directed by the Supreme Court of India in W.P. (Civil) 656/99, the question of framing charges against the Petitioners does not arise for consideration. The Division Bench judgment referred to by the Petitioners in Bright Singh v. The Bharathiyar University 1994(2) L.W. 549 did not go into the question of the circular issued by the University for summary expulsion of a student found to have committed ragging.
In the above circumstances, I am of the view that in the interest of justice and due to the lapse of the time, it is just and necessary that the Respondents are directed to issue the Transfer Certificates without any remark of dismissal against the Petitioner s to enable the Petitioners to join a different institution and to continue and complete their studies. With the above direction, the writ petitions are disposed of. Consequently, the connected W.M. Ps. are closed.