M.R.SASEENDRANATH Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who is the Vice Chancellor of Kerala Veterinary Animal Sciences University (KVASU), has approached this Court with this Writ Petition challenging Exhibit P1 order passed by the 3rd respondent, the Chancellor, by which the petitioner was suspended from service, pending inquiry.

(2.) The facts which led to the filing of Writ Petition are as follows: On 18/2/2024, an incident was reported with respect to the suicide of a student of 2022 Batch of B.VSc. and A.H. Programme of the College of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Pookode, Wayanad, in the Men's hostel of the college. In connection with the said incident, the Police registered a crime and later it was revealed that, the suicide of the said student was due to the ragging and brutal manhandling by a group of students in the said college. On the basis of the same, twelve students of that college were suspended from the college as per order dtd. 22/2/2024 passed by the Dean of the College. Later, the 3rd respondent called for a report with respect to the said incident and the petitioner submitted a report as evidenced by Exhibit P5 on 28/2/2024. Thereafter, Ext.P1 order was issued by the 3rd respondent, suspending the petitioner, with immediate effect. The said communication was dtd. 2/3/2024. This Writ Petition is submitted by the petitioner in such circumstances, challenging Exhibit P1 suspension order by mainly contending that, the 3rd respondent is not vested with the power to suspend the petitioner, as there is no express provision in the Kerala Veterinary and Animal Sciences University Act, 2010 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act 2010') or the Statutes made thereunder. The petitioner also contends that, he cannot be held responsible for the incident referred to above as the same occurred in a constituent college which was under the direct control and supervision of the Dean of University. It was also contended that, the petitioner was out of station when the incident occurred on 18/2/2024 and he came to know about the ragging and manhandling of the deceased by the students only on 21/2/2024, when the Anti-Ragging Cell of the UGC sent an E-mail to the University. Immediately the students who were allegedly involved, were suspended. Therefore, it was pointed out that, there was no lapses or dereliction of duty on the part of the petitioner, so as to warrant an order of suspension and inquiry in this regard.

(3.) A detailed counter affidavit has been submitted on behalf of the 3rd respondent denying the averments in the Writ Petition. It was averred that, the ill-treatment of the deceased by a group of students commenced on 16/2/2024 and he was subjected to continuous torture thereafter, until he died on 18/2/2024. It was also averred that, the ill-treatment was made in front of the other students in the hostel, but yet none of the authorities were aware of the said incident. Even when the body of the deceased was found hanging, there were visible injuries on the body which gave clear indication as to the torture meted out to him, but yet no inquiry was initiated with respect to the same, until a complaint in this regard was submitted by the Anti-Ragging Cell of the UGC on 21/2/2024. It was also the specific case of the 3rd respondent that, the fact that none of the students complained about the incident, despite the fact that it was a case of continuous torture since 16/2/2024, itself indicates that, the said students had no faith on the authorities concerned. It is also averred that, the 3rd respondent had initiated proceedings by suspending the petitioner and also commenced the inquiry invoking his powers under Sec. 9(9) of the Act,2010. As part of the same, a former Judge of this Court has been appointed as the Commission of Inquiry as mandated in the Act, 2010. As regards the authority to suspend, it was averred that, since the 3rd respondent is the appointing authority of the petitioner herein, there is an implied power to suspend him by keeping him out of service, which is intended to ensure a fair and impartial inquiry. The dismissal of the Writ Petition was sought in such circumstances.