B CHAKRADHARI Vs. POTTI SREERAMULU TELUGU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is sought to be preferred and admitted against the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge dated 16.12.2013, whereby and wherein His Lordship dismissed the writ petition. The appellant filed the writ petition claiming the following relief:

(2.) The writ petition was filed in 2012. Going by the prayer of the writ petition, it is impossible to grant the relief. Even if the Court finds that denial of admission to the petitioner is illegal for nothing can be done at this length of time by the Court. The learned Single Judge has recorded that no seats are available or vacant for the academic years 2010-11 and 2012-13. Although the learned Single Judge passed interim order at the initial stage restraining respondent Nos. 5 and 6 from attending classes, we think that the aforesaid interim order has created more problems than curing the same. The learned Single Judge, who finally heard the matter, has recorded on fact as to why the admission to the appellant-writ petitioner was denied. It has been recorded that on 04.07.2012 the petitioner along with some other students barged into the Vice-Chancellor's chambers, shouted slogans and abused the Vice-Chancellor, Registrar, Professors and other teachers involved in the admission process with filthy language. With this the University filed complaints dated 04.07.2012 and 10.07.2012 basing on which the police registered FIR in Crime No. 140 of 2012 under Sections 341 and 506 IPC against the appellant. Apart from lodging the complaint for which the criminal prosecution might have been initiated by this time, the University authorities referred the matter to the disciplinary committee consisting of two Professors of other Universities, one from Osmania University and another from Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Open University to enquire into the matter. The enquiry committee, basing on the available information, by report dated 28.09.2012 recommended to implement the recommendation made by the disciplinary committee. On receipt of the said report, the respondent University refused to admit the appellant into the Ph.D. (Journalism) course.

(3.) Learned Single Judge has also recorded that the aforesaid decision is supported by law, as Section 6(2)(c) of the Potti Sreeramulu Telugu University Act, 1985 provides that the University is not required to admit any person or retain any student whose conduct is prejudicial to the interest of the University or the rights and privileges of other students and teachers. Therefore, on fact finding the University came to the conclusion that the conduct and behaviour of the appellant was prejudicial to the interest of the University.