IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 16TH JULY 2009 / 25TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 25707 of 2007(I) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- K.VAMADEVAN, SRI.R.KESAVAN, AGED 68, PROFESSOR IN ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING, S.H.M.ENGINEERING COLLEGE, KADAKKAL, KOLLAM DISTRICT, RESIDING IN T.C.14/551, NANDAVANAM, TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. MR.G.S.REGHUNATH. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE UNIVERSITY OF KERALA, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS, UNIVERSITY OF KERALA, TRIVANDRUM. 3. THE S.H.M. ENGINEERING COLLEGE, KADAKKAL, KOLLAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER. 4. CHANDRA PILLA, SYNDICATE MEMBER, UNIVERSITY OF KERALA, TRIVANDRUM. 5. C.BHASKARAN, SYNDICATE MEMBER, UNIVERSITY OF KERALA, TRIVANDRUM. 6. RASSAL, MEMBER, KERALA UNIVERSITY SYNDICATE, UNIVERSITY OF KERALA, TRIVANDRUM. 7. PADMAKUMARI, MEMBER, KERALA UNIVERSITY SYNDICATE, UNIVERSITY OF KERALA, TRIVANDRUM. R1 & R2 BY MR.M.RAJAGOPALAN NAIR, SC, KERALA UTY., R3 BY ADVS. MR.SASTHAMANGALAM S. AJITHKUMAR, MR.SHAJIN S.HAMEED, MR.PRABHU VIJAYAKUMAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/07/2009, ALONG WITH W.P.(C). NO. 27076 OF 2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.25707/2007-I: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE DETAILS OF STUDENTS WHO ATTENDED THE WRITTEN EXAMINATIONS FOR S1,S2 ON 30/06/2006. EXT.P.2.A: COPY OF THE DETAILS OF STUDENTS WHO ATTENDED THE WRITTEN EXAMINATIONS FOR S3 ON 01/07/2006. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE TIME TABLE REGARDING THE EXAMINATIONS. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 02/01/2007. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE ORDER NO. SDC/2007 DTD. 27/07/2007 SENT BY THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBIT: EXT.R1.A: COPY OF THE EXPLANATION SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER BEFORE THE ENQUIRY COMMITTEE. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). Nos.25707/2007-I & 27076/2007 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 16th day of July, 2009 J U D G M E N T Identical issues arise in the writ petitions and therefore, they are disposed of by a common judgment. 2. The petitioner in W.P.(C).No.25707/2007 is a retired Selection Grade Lecturer from Government Engineering College, Thiruvananthapuram. He was appointed by the third respondent institution as Professor in the Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering as per order dated 03/01/2003. The third respondent is a Self Financing Engineering College affiliated to the University of Kerala. 3. Semester examinations were conducted in the College during the year 2006 and the petitioner was the Additional Chief Superintendent for them. It is pointed out in the writ petition that the general duty of the Additional Chief Superintendent was only to help the Chief Superintendent of Examinations to conduct the examinations. Apart from the petitioner, the first respondent University had appointed their own Additional Chief Superintendents to supervise the examination. 4. There was an allegation that mass copying was done in the College which was enquired into by the University. It appears that W.P.(C). Nos.25707/2007 & 27076/2007 -:2:- due to the said issue, results of 42 students were withheld and Ext.P4 is the communication in this regard of the Controller of Examinations sent to the Principal of the institution. The Principal and two other invigilators were given information to appear before the Standing Committee on Students' Discipline. It is submitted that the petitioner was not informed of anything but on the request of the then Principal, he along with the invigilators accompanied the Principal. The main grievance raised by the petitioner is that without anything more and without serving copy of the report, or without seeking any explanation from them, by Ext.P5, it was informed by the Controller of Examinations that the petitioner and the invigilators are black listed and have been debarred permanently from teaching in any College affiliated to the University of Kerala, Thiruvananthapuram. 5. The petitioner in W.P.(C).No.27076/2007, was appointed as Lecturer in S.H.M Engineering College, Kadakkal from 17/09/2003 on contract basis. The petitioner has got a case that the petitioner was regularised in service as per order dated 30/08/2005. Thereafter, she got admission for M.Tech in the Nooral Islam Engineering College, Kumaracoil, Tamil Nadu and had taken leave from June 2006. Later by Ext.P3, she was directed to appear before the Standing Committee on the Students' Discipline on 09/04/2007 at 2 p.m in connection with the mass copying of the students in S1, S2 and S3 B.Tech Degree Examination. Explanation was submitted as W.P.(C). Nos.25707/2007 & 27076/2007 -:3:- per Ext.P4. In Ext.P4, the petitioner had stated that she has already availed leave for two years from June 2006. Without any further notice Ext.P5 was communicated. 6. The University has filed a detail counter affidavit. 7. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that Ext.P5 order is not one issued as per the Statutes of the University or after a valid enquiry. No notice was issued proposing the punishment. It is pointed out that a disciplinary action can be taken only by a Disciplinary Authority provided under the University Act and Statutes and the Students' Disciplinary Committee has no power or authority to make any recommendation and, the Syndicate has no authority to pass any order against the petitioners. It is therefore, pointed out that Ext.P5 cannot be supported. As far as the petitioners are concerned, debarring them permanently from teaching in any affiliated Colleges under the University tantamount to removal from the service as the petitioners are working in self financing Colleges which are affiliated to the University of Kerala. 8. The learned Standing Counsel for the University submitted that the University took action based on the report of the Students' Disciplinary Committee who had summoned all the students and the students were heard also. All of them admitted that the invigilators supplied draft answers to them and allowed them to sit in groups after 90 minutes of the start of the examination and persuaded them to W.P.(C). Nos.25707/2007 & 27076/2007 -:4:- copy the answer from the draft. 9. It is also averred in paragraph (6) of the statement filed on behalf of the University in W.P.(C).No.25707/2007 that from the explanations of students and invigilators etc., the Students' Disciplinary Committee was convinced that malpractice was massively done in the College and requested Syndicate to proceed against them. The Syndicate decided to take action against the students by cancelling their examination and against the petitioners and invigilators to debar them. 10. A reading of Ext.P5 shows that stringent penalty has been imposed by debarring the petitioners permanently from teaching in any College affiliated to the University of Kerala. There cannot be any doubt that the same will affect the petitioners adversely in pursuing their avocation in life. Therefore, the said action should have been preceded by a proper notice and a hearing on the issues involved. Probably, they could have been debarred from functioning as invigilators in any examinations, if it was required. But still, that is a matter for the University to decide. Herein, the order leads to adverse civil consequences to the petitioners, and such orders can be passed only by complying with all the principles of natural justice. It is well settled that nobody can be punished unheard also. 11. There is some dispute regarding the availability of any particular prescribed procedure in this matter as sanctioned by W.P.(C). Nos.25707/2007 & 27076/2007 -:5:- relevant First Statutes and Rules. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that they are only teachers in Self Financing Colleges and there are no particular mode or rules under which such a penalty can be imposed on them. Be that as it may, since the order is not passed in compliance of the principles of natural justice, Ext.P5 in both the writ petitions are quashed. The respondents, if so advised, will issue appropriate notices to the writ petitioners concerned giving details of the allegations against them and take action as enjoined by law after affording all opportunities to them. The action in this regard will be finalised within three months from the date of receipt of the copy of this judgment. The writ petitions are disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms