IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN THURSDAY, THE 26TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 5TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 17770 of 2009(M) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- ANEESH NARAYAN, AGED 21 YEARS, STUDENT OF B. TECH (8TH SEMESTOR VIMAL JYOTHI ENGINEERING COLLEGE, JYOTHI NAGAR, CHEMPERI, KANNUR DIST. BY ADV. SRI.SIVAN MADATHIL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. PRINCIPAL, VIMAL JYOTHI ENGINEERING COLLEGE, JYOTHI NAGAR, CHEMPERI, KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. JACOB ZACHARIA, (HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT) CONVENOR-STUDENT ENQUIRY COMMITTEE VIMAL JYOTHI, ENGINEERING COLLEGE, JYOTHI NAGAR, CHEMPERI, KANNUR DIST. 3. FR.JINU, LECTURER (HUMANITIES), CHAIRMAN (STUDENTS DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE VIMAL JYOTHI ENGINEERING COLLEGE, JYOTHI NAGAR, CHEMPERI, KANNUR DISTRICT. 4. UNIVERSITY OF KANNUR, KANNUR, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, ADV. SRI.M.SASEENDRAN,SC,KANNUR UNIVERSITY FOR R4 SRI.GEORGE MECHERIL FOR R1-3 SRI.P.NARAYANAN, GP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N.RAVINDRAN, J ....................... W.P.(C).17770/2009 ....................... Dated this the 26th day of November, 2009 JUDGMENT The petitioner joined the Vimal Jyothi college of Engineering for the B.Tech degree course in Computer Science & Engineering in the academic year 2005-06. The classes commenced on 16.8.2005. During the final semester of the course, he along with two other students was placed under suspension pending enquiry, by Ext.P1 memo dated 27.4.2009 issued by the Principal of the college. By the very same memo, an enquiry committee consisting of three members was constituted and the committee was directed to conduct an enquiry and to submit a report on 30.4.2009. An enquiry was accordingly conducted in which the petitioner participated. Thereafter, based on Ext.R1(g) report submitted by the enquiry committee, Ext.P2 show cause notice dated 30.4.2009 was issued to the petitioner calling upon him to show cause why disciplinary action should not be taken against him. It was stated that the enquiry committee had reported that the petitioner is guilty of the charges levelled against him. W.P.(C).17770/09 2 The petitioner was asked to submit his reply before 1.6.2009. The Principal also directed that the petitioner will continue under suspension till his reply is considered on 1.6.2009. He also directed that the petitioner's application for registration to appear for the eighth semester examination will be withheld and the matter reconsidered on 1.6.2009, the reopening date. On receipt of Ext.P2 memo, the petitioner submitted Ext.P3 reply dated 30.4.2009. 2. After the college reopened on 1.6.2009, the committee constituted as per Ext.P1 considered Ext.P3 reply. Thereafter Ext.P4 memo dated 2.6.2009 was issued, once again calling upon the petitioner to explain why he should not be suspended for a period of one year from 27.4.2009, the date of the initial order of suspension. By Ext.P4, the Principal however permitted the petitioner to appear for the University examination. The petitioner submitted his explanation on 9.6.2009. The disciplinary committee considered the explanation submitted by the petitioner. The disciplinary committee recommended that as the petitioner has tendered apology, a benevolent attitude should be taken. The committee was of the W.P.(C).17770/09 3 opinion that the suspension should be for a period of ten months from 27.4.2009. It appears that the Chairman of the institution requested the disciplinary committee to reconsider the matter and the committee again considered the issue on 12.6.2009. The committee stuck to its earlier stand. Thereupon the Principal of the college issued Ext.P7 order continuing the suspension of the petitioner till 26.2.2010. He also ordered that the internal marks awarded to the petitioner will be forwarded to the University only after the expiry of the suspension period. Shortly thereafter, the eighth semester examination was held in which the petitioner was allowed to participate. This writ petition was thereafter filed challenging Ext.P7 and seeking a direction to the first respondent college to permit the petitioner to present the project assignments and to participate in the viva-voce scheduled to be held from 28.6.2009. The petitioner also seeks a direction to the first respondent to forward the internal marks to the University within a specified time. 3. This Court had passed an interim order on 25.6.2009 directing the first respondent to permit the petitioner to present the project assignments of the eighth W.P.(C).17770/09 4 semester and to permit him to participate in the viva-voce. This Court also directed that the result of the eighth semester examination shall be declared only after getting orders from this Court. 4. The petitioner challenges Ext.P7 on various grounds including the contention that the punishment awarded is disproportionate to the gravity of charges. He contends that the enquiry was not proper and that a copy of the complaint alleged to have been submitted by the student at whose instance proceedings were initiated against the petitioner, was not furnished to him. The Principal of the college and the learned standing counsel appearing for the Kannur University have filed a counter affidavit and a statement respectively. The Principal of the college justifies the action taken against the petitioner. 5. I have considered the submissions made at the Bar by the learned counsel appearing on both sides. It is not in dispute that classes for the eighth semester namely the last semester of the course came to an end on 24.7.2009. Thereafter the students were required to submit project assignments. The University examinations were held in June 2009 and the viva-voce towards the end W.P.(C).17770/09 5 of June 2009. The petitioner participated in all the examinations. It is thus evident that after 30.6.2009, the petitioner has no association with the college. I am therefore constrained to hold that the Principal was not competent to order that the petitioner will continue to be under suspension till 26.2.2010 notwithstanding the expiry of the period of the course of study and the appearance of the petitioner in the terminal examination. I am therefore constrained to hold that Ext.P7 order in so far as it directs that the petitioner will continue to be under suspension after 30.6.2009 and till 26.2.2010 cannot be sustained. 6. It is the admitted case of both the parties that though the petitioner was placed under suspension, based on the hall ticket issued by the University, the college authorities had permitted the petitioner to appear for the last examination. It was in view of the said fact that this Court had directed that he should be permitted to submit the project assignments and also to participate in the viva- voce. Since the petitioner has already appeared for the final semester examination with the consent of the college authorities, on the admitted facts of the case, the petitioner was also entitled to submit the project assignments and to W.P.(C).17770/09 6 participate in the viva-voce. The situation would have been different if he had been placed under suspension either at the beginning of the semester or during an earlier semester and was also not permitted to appear for the examination. The pleadings discloses that his companion students were issued transfer certificates on completion of the course of study with effect from 10.7.2009. In such circumstances, I am constrained to hold that the petitioner is entitled to have the results of the eighth semester examination declared taking into account the internal marks awarded to him by the college authorities. I accordingly dispose of this writ petition with the following directions. (i). The order placing the petitioner under suspension shall cease to be in force with effect from 1.7.2009 (ii). The first respondent shall forward the internal marks awarded to the petitioner to the Controller of Examinations, Kannur University, within two weeks from the date on which the petitioner produces a certified copy of this judgment before the Principal of the college. W.P.(C).17770/09 7 (iii). The Controller of Examinations, Kannur University shall, within two weeks from the date of receipt of the internal marks from the college authorities, publish the result of the eighth semester examination for which the petitioner had appeared in June 2009, if besides the suspension there is no other impediment in declaring the results. Upon declaration of the results, the mark list for the eighth semester examination shall also be issued to him. If there is any impediment other than the suspension of the petitioner for publishing the result of the eighth semester examination, it will be open to the Controller of Examinations to withhold the results and to communicate the decision to the petitioner. In that event, it will be open to the petitioner to challenge the said decision in other appropriate proceedings. P.N.RAVINDRAN, Judge mrcs