1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 19.09.2011 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.MANIKUMAR W.P.(MD) No.3834 of 2011 R.Balamurugan ... Petitioner Vs. 1)The Principal/Special Officer i/c, Dr.Kalaignar Arts & Science College, Lalgudi-621 601. Trichy District. 2)The Registrar, Bharathidasan University, Trichy, Trichy District. ... Respondents Prayer : Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to readmit the petitioner herein into the 1st respondent college so as to continue his B.A. (History) Course without any break. For petitioner : Mr.S.M.Mohan Gandhi For Respondents : Mr.V.R.Shanmuganathan O R D E R A first year student of B.A. (History) in Dr.Kalaignar Arts & Science College, Lalgudi, Trichy District, the petitioner herein, has sought for a Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent, to readmit him, so as to continue his course. 2. According to the petitioner, he joined the 1st respondent college during the academic year 2010-11. The college is affiliated to Bharathidasan University. That on 29.01.2011, a Blood Donation Camp was conducted in the college premises. On that day, during the interval time, when the petitioner was going to a Tea shop, a second year BBA girl student picked up quarrel with the petitioner that he is doing useless things in the Blood Donation Camp. It is the allegation of the petitioner that the said student attempted to assault him with her friends and when he resisted, she fell down and was rushed to the Principal's room and she gave a complaint against the petitioner, as if, the petitioner had misbehaved with her. However, the Principal of the 1st respondent college without making any enquiry into the incident, straightway compelled the petitioner to give a letter to the effect that as if he has sought for Transfer Certificate due to family circumstances. According to the petitioner, under the threat and coercion, he was constrained to give such a letter. 3.The petitioner has further contended that subsequently, there was a compromise between him and the second year BBA girl student. In these circumstances, the petitioner has come forward with the present writ petition, alleging violation of principles of natural justice in sending https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 him out of the college. He further submitted that the Principal of the 1st respondent college has failed to consider that there was a compromise between the petitioner and the girl student alleged to have been assaulted by the petitioner. In fact, the petitioner also tendered apology to the said girl student. In these circumstances, sending the petitioner out of the college is a severe punishment. According to him, only out of compulsion of the Principal, he was constrained to give a letter, seeking Transfer Certificate. He has also submitted that the 1st respondent not only issued Transfer Certificate to the petitioner but also made adverse remarks which would spoil his career. 4. Considering the averments made, this Court has issued a notice on 31.03.2011 regarding admission. Thereafter, the matter was listed on 28.03.2011. Record of proceedings shows that on the said date, there was no appearance on behalf of the 1st respondent though his name was shown in the cause list. However, to give one more chance, Registry was directed to list the matter on 30.06.2011. On 07.09.2011, learned counsel for the petitioner sought for an urgent hearing and hence, the writ petition was directed to be included in the motion list. 5. Though the 1st respondent has not filed any counter affidavit, on the basis of the instructions, Mr.V.R.Shanmuganathan, learned counsel for the 1st respondent college submitted that on 29.01.2011, a second year BBA girl student of the 1st respondent college gave a complaint to the Principal, stating that the petitioner slapped her on her face and that she fell down. According to the victim, he also punched on her head. When she reported the matter to the Principal, he adviced her to take treatment. Subsequently, on the same day, the father of the injured also gave a complaint to the first respondent to take appropriate disciplinary action against the petitioner. When the petitioner was summoned, he gave a letter admitting his guilt and sought for issuance of Transfer Certificate. Accordingly, Mark Sheet and the Transfer Certificate were issued and he acknowledged. He denied the allegation that the petitioner was compelled to submit a letter. 6. Learned counsel for the 1st respondent further submitted that when the petitioner himself has given a letter dated 29.01.2011, admitting his guilt, there is no need to conduct a regular enquiry. He further submitted that there is no question of compulsion when the petitioner himself come forward with a requisition to issue Transfer Certificate and the presumption that the Principal would have compelled him to receive Transfer Certificate, is rebuttable in view of voluntary admission on the part of the petitioner to the guilt. In such circumstances, he submitted that issuance of Transfer Certificate was on his own accord and therefore, there is no question of re-admission of the petitioner into the college. For the abovesaid reasons, he prayed for dismissal of the writ petition. 7. Heard the learned counsel for the contesting parties and perused the materials available on record. 8. Perusal of the true copies of the complaints dated 29.01.2011 of the second year BBA girl student and her father shows that on 29.01.2011, when the complainant was in a Xerox shop, near a bus stop, the petitioner is said to have asked the complainant as to why she had said something wrong about him, for which, she had denied. The https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 complainant has further stated that even before she could answer, the petitioner slapped her. Her friends helped her to stand and before she come to normal position, the petitioner hit her again on head, with something like a key chain and she fell down, bleeding. Thereafter, she was brought to the office of the Principal and she was adviced to get treatment and accordingly, treated in Government Hospital, Lalgudi, Trichy District. Thereafter, the complainant and her father have met the Principal and gave separate complaints dated 29.01.2011 respectively. 9. Material produced before this Court by the 1st respondent shows that she had taken treatment in Government Hospital, Lalgudi, and in a Private Hospital. The petitioner has also given a letter dated 29.01.2011, to the effect that he had beaten the said girl student and that she suffered injury and therefore, requested the Principal to issue Transfer Certificate. Copies of the complaints dated 29.01.2011 given by the second year BBA girl student, her father and the letter of the petitioner indicate that on 29.01.2011, there was some untoward incident. 10. Though the petitioner has submitted that there was a compromise between him and the said girl student, this Court is not inclined to advert to the same. However, from the pleadings and material on record placed before this Court, it could be deduced that something had happened on 29.01.2011, which made the petitioner to appear before the Principal, which could have been made, only if he was summoned or directed to appear, by the Principal or on his specific direction. No sooner incident was reported to him by the girl student or by others, whether such incident had occurred inside the premises of the college or even outside. Certainly, if the allegation are true, it is a misconduct on the part of the student, which requires an enquiry. Materials on record shows that when the girl student met the Principal, he has advised her to get treatment. Naturally, after coming to knowledge of the incident, the petitioner would have been directed to appear. In all probabilities, the petitioner would have admitted the guilt, but a student, who has just completed his first semester in B.A. (History) course in December 2010, would not have volunteered to get the transfer certificate and discontinue his course, as it would certainly affect his educational career. Before this Court, the petitioner has sworn to an affidavit stating that he was compelled to give a letter dated 29.01.2011 to the Principal of the 1st respondent college to issue Transfer Certificate. Even assuming that the petitioner has committed a serious misconduct, he deserves appropriate punishment, after formulating a specific charge by the disciplinary authority of a private college and that he should have been served with atleast a notice, calling for his explanation, as to why appropriate action should not be taken against him. Admittedly, no such procedure has been followed in this case. 11. The material on record indicates that when the second year BBA girl student was alleged to have been assaulted, she was taken to the Principal by her friends and after getting treatment, separate complaints have been preferred by the injured and her father and that the petitioner who met the Principal would have been compelled to give a letter for issuance of the Transfer Certificate and apprehending disciplinary action and the remarks in the Transfer Certificate, he would have given such letter admitting guilt. Even assuming that a detailed enquiry like that of a departmental enquiry is not required to be conducted by the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4 Principal of the 1st respondent college, it is incumbent on his part atleast to formulate specific charges and put the petitioner on defence. In such a view of the matter, there is a violation of principle of natural justice. 12.In the abovesaid circumstances, the contention of the 1st respondent that there is no need to conduct any enquiry cannot be accepted. Only when there is a charge in the form of either a notice calling for explanation or charge memo, issued by the competent authority, it can be said that some disciplinary action has been taken against the petitioner, for which he had volunteered to accept. In the case on hand, there is no notice issued by the Principal of the College alleging any specific act of misconduct. A Writ of Mandamus can be sought for, if there is any right to be enforced. Courts have held that a Writ can be issued even against a private educational institution, if there is any violation of principles of natural justice. 13. Hence, there shall be a Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to re-admit the petitioner to the first year B.A. (History) into college and formulate specific charges against the petitioner and if any explanation is offered, he is directed to proceed with the same and pass appropriate orders. 14. In the result, the writ petition is allowed as prayed for. No costs. Sd/- Deputy Registrar (Writs) / True Copy / Assistant Registrar To 1)The Principal/Special Officer i/c, Dr.Kalaignar Arts & Science College, Lalgudi-621 601. Trichy District. 2)The Registrar, Bharathidasan University, Trichy, Trichy District. +1CC TO MR.S.M.MOHAN GANDHI, ADVOCATE SR.32123 Nb/Mpk SR : 22.09.2011 : 4p/4c W.P.(MD) No.3834 of 2011 19.09.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/