THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.27582 and 28067 of 2008 Date:10.11.2009 Between: N. Surapu Raju and others. ..Petitioners and The Jawaharlal Nehru Technology University and another... Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.27582 and 28067 of 2008 COMMON ORDER: The petitioners are students of B.Tech in S.S. Institute of Technology. Proceedings were initiated against them under the Andhra Pradesh Prohibition of Ragging Act, 1997 (‘the Act’ for short). Crime No.1187 of 2008 was registered against them in the Court of IX Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, Kukatpally, alleging the offences under various provisions of the Act. They were granted bail by the trial Court. The parents of the petitioners appeared to have addressed letters dated 15.11.2008 to the college about the petitioners not being permitted to attend the classes. In reply thereto, the Principal addressed letters stating that the petitioners were placed under suspension. The petitioners are feeling aggrieved by the said letters. It is stated that no orders of suspension were served upon the petitioners, much less the period of suspension is indicated as provided under Section 6 of the Act. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondents. As mentioned earlier, a crime has been registered against the petitioners and they are facing prosecution. Section 4 of the Act provides for punishment of different magnitude depending upon the proof of the allegations made against the accused. Section 5 of the Act mandates that whenever a person is convicted for the offence under Section 4 of the Act, he shall be dismissed from the educational institution. Section 6 of the Act reads as under: 6. Suspension of student: (1) Without prejudice to the foregoing provisions, whenever any student complains of ragging to the head or manager of an educational institution, such head or manager shall inquire into or cause an inquiry to be made into the same forthwith and if the complaint is prima facie found true, shall suspend the student or students complained against for such period as may be deemed necessary. (2) The decision of the head or manager of the educational institution under sub-section (1) shall be final. It is no doubt true that the institution is conferred with the power to place a student under suspension pending an enquiry into the matter. An order passed under this provision must indicate that an enquiry is pending and that the period of suspension must be specified. In the instant case, the petitioners have not been served with any orders of suspension. The communications/letters given to the parents read as under: I have gone through the application made by you dated 15.11.2008. As your son has been placed under suspension till further orders and your son is an accused No.5 in the criminal case bearing Crime No.1187 of 2008 of Police Station Kukatpally for the Offence Under Sections 3 & 4 of A.P. Prohibition of Ragging Act, 1997 and Section 323 of I.P.C. is still pending before the Hon’ble Court of the IX Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, Kukatpally at Miyapur. We are unable to revoke the suspension placed upon your son and permit him to take examinations, as requested by you. This does not fit into Section 6 of the Act. Inasmuch as the career of the students is involved, strict compliance with the relevant provisions of law is needed. Hence, the Writ Petitions are allowed. It is, however, directed that further action against the petitioners would depend upon the outcome of the criminal case pending against them. Henceforth, the petitioners shall be entitled to pursue the course in accordance with the relevant regulations framed by the University. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J 10th November, 2009 GHN