(1.) The petitioner was a student of Maharaja Agrasen College (respondent No. 2) which is affiliated to the University of Delhi (respondent No. 1 ).
(2.) According to the petitioner, he successfully cleared the IInd year of the B.A. (Pass) Course in August, 1996 and he was entitled to be admitted to the IIIrd year (final year) of the said course On 21st August, 1996 the petitioner went to deposit his fee for admission to the IIIrd year. However, he was prevented from depositing the fee and was told that the Principal of the college had issued instructions that fee should not be accepted from the petitioner. The petitioner was not given any reason for the said decision. The father of the petitioner went and met the Principal on 22nd August, 1996. He was advised to withdraw the name of the petitioner from the college. It was also threatened that in case he did not do so the Principal would see to it that the petitioner would not be admitted to the IIIrd year. On 26th August, 1996, the petitioner and certain other students were summoned to the office of the Principal where they were man-handled by the Principal and the college staff. Thereafter when the father of the petitioner went to see the Principal to enquire about the above incident, a show cause notice dated 23rd August, 1996 was given to him wherein it was mentioned that a complaint had been received from one Mr. Sanjay Kumar, a IInd year student of B. Com (Hon) against the petitioner. The said show cause notice referred to a complaint received from Mr. Sanjay Kumar on 30th July, 1996 alleging that the petitioner indulged in ragging students in the canteen premises and that in the course of ragging the petitioner had severely beaten up the complainant. The petitioner was asked to explain latest by 29th August, 1996 why disciplinary action should not be taken against him. On 29th August, 1996 another show cause notice was issued to the petitioner wherein it was alleged that the petitioner alongwith 15 other students had forcibly entered the Principal's office, disrupted some classes and assaulted the employees. The petitionerwas asked to show cause why disciplinary proceedings be not initiated against him. The replies to both show cause notices were submitted by him on 29th August, 1996. No personal hearing was ever given to him. Thereafter in a meeting held on 3rd September, 1996, the Disciplinary Committee of the college decided that the replies of the petitioner were unsatisfactory and recommended that the petitioner should not be admitted to the next course i.e. IIIrd years B.A. (Pass) course. The said recommendation of the Disciplinary Committee was submitted to the Principal for his approval. By a letter dated September 10,1996 (Annexure P-4), respondent No. 2, informed the petitioner that as per the recommendations of the Disciplinary Committee his involvement in the incident of beating Mr. Sanjay Kumar had been found to be proved and that he was not permitted to deposit the fee for admission to the next course i.e. B.A. (Pass) IIIrd year course. Being aggrieved by the said action of respondent No. 2, the petitioner submitted a detailed representation dated 19th September, 1996 to respondent No. 1 contending that the recommendations of the Disciplinary Committee be set aside and that he be permitted to deposit fee for admission to the B.A. (Pass) IIIrd year course. The said representation was forwarded by respondent No. 1 to the Dean of Students Welfare for enquiry into the contents of the same. The Dean of the Students Welfare by his letter dated 11th October, 1996 requested the Principal to persuade the Disciplinary Committee of the college to reconsider the matter sympathetically. The petitioner also submitted another application to respondent No. 2 and the Disciplinary Committee of the college seeking sympathetic reconsideration of his case. However, the petitioner did not receive any reply to the said application. Thereafter, the petitioner made repeated requests to respondent No. 2 as also the Disciplinary Committee to reconsider their stand and to permit him to deposit his fee for attending the IIIrd year B.A. (Pass) course. But there was no favourable response. Thereupon the petitioner filed C.W. No. 4343/96 in this Court praying that he be permitted to deposit his fee and attend his classes for the B.A. (Pass) IIIrd year course. When the said writ petition was listed on 21st March, 1997, the petitioner sought leave to withdraw the writ petition since the examinations were scheduled to commence from 22nd March, 1997. He also sought a direction to the respondent college to permit the petitioner to appear in the B.A. (Pass) IIIrd year examination and also offered to seek admission elsewhere thereafter. The prayer was not opposed by the Counsel for the college and accordingly by order dated 21st March, 1997 this Court permitted the petitioner to withdraw the writ petition and directed that the petitioner would be allowed to take the examinations by respondent college subject to completion of formalities prescribed under the Rules. Pursuant to the directions contained in this Court's order dated 21st March, 1997, the petitioner approached thecollegeon21stMarch, 1997and sought to deposithis admission fee and take the admission Roll Number. However, the college authorities refused to accept the fee and informed the petitioner that the Principal had specifically directed not to accept the fee of the petitioner. The petitioner was forcibly ejected from the college premises. Thereafter on 22nd March, 1997, the petitioner approached the college with a copy of this Court's order dated 21st March, 1997 and sought permission to deposit the fee. However, he was not permitted to enter the college even though he succeeded in serving a copy of the order through the watchman of the college. The petitioner, through his Counsel, sent a representation dated 31st March, 1997 to respondent No. 2 and also to the Counsel for respondent No. 2. Still the petitioner was not permitted even to enter the college. Therefore, the petitioner filed C.M. No. 2659/97 in C.W. No. 4343/96. The said application was disposed of by this Court on 9th April, 1997 directing respondent college to reconsider the case of the petitioner on the basis of the directions contained in the order dated 21st March, 1997 as well as on the basis of the relief granted to similarly situated students. Thereafter the petitioner received a letter dated 10th April, 1997 from the Principal intimating that he could not be permitted to take IIIrd year examinations on the ground that the petitioner had not been admitted as a regular student in the IIIrd year and that he had not submitted the examination fee and form before the due date and that he did not have the requisite attendance. Even though the reasons given by the Principal were erroneous the petitioner did not pursue the matter any further as the examinations had already been commenced and he resigned himself to the fact that he lost out one entire academic year without any fault or lapse on his part. On 5th June, 1997 i.e. in the fresh academic session the petitioner once again approached the college and sought to take admission in the IIIrd year course since the period for which he had been denied admission had already lapsed. However, once again he was prevented from entering the college let alone depositing the free. Hence the petitioner submitted a representation dated 6th June, 1997 to respondent No. I as well as to respondent No. 2 pointing out that while directing not to admit the petitioner to the IIIrd year course, the Disciplinary Committee had not specified any period and hence the necessary inference was that the said recommendation was to remain in force only for one academic year. It was also pointed outthat there was not plausible reason for not permitting the petitioner to deposit the fee in the next academic year commencing from June, 1997. Since no reply was received to the said representation for one entire month, the petitioner sent a legal notice dated 30th June, 1997 to respondent Nos. I and 2 calling upon them to permit him to take admission to the IIIird year B.A. (Pass) course for the academic year commencing from June 5,1997. Since no reply was received, the petitioner was constrained to file this writ petition praying for a direction to respondent No. 2 to permit the petitioner to deposit his admission fee and to admit the petitioner to the IIIrd year B.A. (Pass) course in the Maharaja Agrasen College.
(3.) The Principal of the college has filed a reply affidavit on behalf of respondent No. 2. According to the said reply affidavit, the disciplinary action taken against the petitioner was very much in consonance with the provisions of the University Ordinance. Ordinance XV-B gives power to expel a student. Since the petitioner was not a bona fide student of the college at the time of taking action against him as he had not completed his IInd year B.A. (Pass) and had not been admitted to IIIrd year, the Disciplinary Committee recommended the action of not allowing the petitioner to deposit his fees which is equivalent to explusion in the case of a bonafide student. It is also stated in the reply affidavit that looking at the past acts of indiscipline and the opportunities given to the petitioner, the Disciplinary Committee was of the opinion that the petitioner had failed to improve himself and that the activities of the petitioner had gone to the extent of threatening the harmony and disrupting the normal academic life of the college. It is further stated that the second respondent is directly responsible for the maintenance of disicipline in the college. The behaviour of the petitioner was criminal in nature and was affecting the discipline and peaceful atmosphere of the institution. Under such circumstances, the second respondent had no other alternative but to act in a firm manner to maintain discipline in the interests of students, staff and institution. It is contended that Ordinace XV-B(2) empowers the Principal of the college with all authority to exercise all such disciplinary powers to expel, rusticate, impose fine, debar a student from taking University or College examination for one or more years or cancel the result of such student. It is stated that the second respondent invoked the above-mentioned powers under the University Ordinace in the best interest of students and institution in dealing with the gross indiscipline of the petitioner bordering on criminal behaviour. According to respondent No. 2, the petitioner had organised an unauthorised picnic on 29.9.1995 in violation of the rules of discipline of the college and on that account the parents of the petitioner were required to meet the Principal and the petitioner was also asked to explain his conduct. On 1.12.1995 a complaint was filed by Shri Atui Bhatia, a student of B. Com (Hons) IInd year against the petitioner. Mr. Atul Bhatia and one Mr. Sidharth Singh were contestants for the post of President and Treasurer respectively of the College Union. The petitioner wanted both of them to resign and threatened with dire consequences if they failed to do so. As a result of that, Mr. Sidhartn Singh withdrew his name from the nomination. On 14.12.1995 Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh of B.A. (Pass) IInd year made another complaint against the petitioner and others for having assaulted him. On 15.12.1995 a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner and the petitioner in is reply admitted his involvement in the incident and apologised for the same. The Disciplinary Committee found that the petitioner was the main person who assaulted Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh and on the recommendation of the Disciplinary Committee, a fine of Rs. 500.00 was imposed on the petitioner. On 30.7.1996 yet another complaint was made by another student Mr. Sanjay Kumar against the petitioner. A complaint was also received from the Canteen Contractor and the case was marked to the Convener of the Disciplinary Committee. By a letter dated 31.7.1996 the father of the petitioner was asked to meet the Principal alongwith the petitioner latest by 1.8.1996. The letter was delivered to Mr. Jagjit Singh, father of the petitioner by hand by the Section Officer in the college office. Since the father of the petitioner did not meet the Principal, another letter was sent to him by registered post on 21.8.1996 requesting him to meet the Principal. On 21.8.1996 a Notice was put up on the College Notice Board asking the petitioner to appear before the Disciplinary Committee in person on 23.8.1996. It is stated that the Disciplinary Committee held its meeting on 23.8.1996 to consider the complaint of Mr. Sanjay Kumar against the petitioner. The petitioner did not appear before the Disciplinary Committee on 23.8.1996 pursuant to the Notice put up on the College Notice Board on 21.8.1996. Hence on 23.8.1996 the Convener of the Disciplinary Committee issued a show cause notice to the petitioner based on the complaint received from Mr. Sanjay Kumar on 30.7.1996. As per the complaint, the petitioner had indulged in ragging students in the canteen premises and in the course of ragging he had severely beaten up the complainant Mr. Sanjay Kumar. The petitioner was, therefore, asked to explain by 29.8.1996 why disciplinary action should not be taken against him. Again another show cause notice dated 29.8.1996 was issued to the petitioner for the reason that on 26.8.1996 he had led a group of about 15 students and made forcible entry into the Principal's office using abusive language, disrupting classes and beating up the college employees and that on 27th and 29th August, 1996 the petitioner had intimidated the students and stopped them from entering the college premises.