FAROOQ AHMAD BANDEY Vs. PRINCIPAL, REGIONAL ENGINEERING COLLEGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE ten petitions which have been referred to this Bench by one of us in view of the fact that they raise questions of considerable importance relating to the conduct of disciplinary inquiries by educational institutions, shall be disposed of by this judgment as they raise common questions of law and fact.

(2.) THE petitioners in all these petitions are students of the Regional Engineering College, Miskeen Bagh, Srinagar, who have completed considerable number of semesters prescribed for the Bachelor of Engineering course. Respondent No. 1 is the Principal of the said college and respondent No. 2 is the University of Kashmir of which the said college is a constituent unit. It appears that on 31st of October 1974 a deputation, of students of the College wanted to wait on the Principal of the College who asked the deputationists to meet him at 1 PM on that day in his office at the old campus situate in Naseem Bagh instead of trying to meet him at his residence. It is alleged that annoyed at the attitude of the principal, the petitioners alongwith some other students gate -crashed into the compound of the house of the Principal ignoring the warning given to them to refrain from doing so, indulged in rowdyism, raised impertinent slogans hurled filthy abuses at the staff and the authorities of the college and threw stones at the Principals house resulting in breakage of a large number of glass panes. They are also alleged to have stopped students buses in pursuance of a concerned plan and forcibly prevented the students from attending their classes.

(3.) CHARGES in respect of the aforesaid acts of rowdyism and vandalism alleged to have been committed by the petitioners and others were framed against them and they were asked to submit their explanation in regard thereto and to appear in the Principals office on particular, dates between 8th of December 1974 and 28th of February 1975 to hear the evidence against them and to cross examine the witnesses who intended to be examined in support of the charges. Before the actual dates set for examination of the witnesses, some of the petitioners, namely Shaukat Chowdhury, Kuldip Kumar, Raxdan, Mohd Ashraf Mir, Shah Shabir Ahmad, Ali Mohd., and Kumar Nain Singh represented to respondent No. 1 that they would not participate in the disciplinary proceedings unless some person other than himself, i.e. other than respondent No. 1 was appointed as the Inquiry Officer. On the dates fixed for the inquiry, another application was made by the said petitioners to respondent No. 1 requesting him to grant them an adjournment to enable them to engage a counsel. Both the applications were rejected by the Principal. The first application was rejected by him on the grounds that he was the only legitimate authority empowered to act under the statute 25 of the statutes framed under the University Act to hold inquiries into the cases of indiscipline and that while undertaking and conducting such inquiries and awarding punishments as provided by the aforesaid statute, he was acting as a Tribunal and not as a complainant. The second application was rejected by respondent No. 1 on the grounds that the inquiry was to determine facts and not points of law, that the college had not engaged any lawyer, and that it had been decided to faithfully and fully observe the principals of natural justice and to give an opportunity to the concerned to meet the charges framed against them. Thereafter respondent No. 1 proceeded to hold inquiries on the various dates between 8th of December 1974 and 28th February 1975 and thereafter forthwith passed orders expelling the petitioners from the College. Aggrieved by these orders, the petitioners have come up to this court by way of petitions under S. 103 of the State Constitution.