CHHAVI PRAKASH SAINI Vs. CENTRAL UNIVERSITY OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned Senior Counsel Mr. G.K. Garg, appearing on behalf of respondent at the very outset submits that vide order dt. 3.5.2012 the punishment inflicted upon the petitioner for his misconduct in terms of order dt. 13.3.2012 has since been reduced and the petitioner would be allowed to attend the regular classes of IV Semester commencing from Dec., 2012 and to appear in the examination after completion of the Semester as per the University Rules.

(2.) Counsel for the petitioner submits that the order of punishment dt. 13.03.2012 is disproportionate to the misconduct of the petitioner wherein the only serious allegation found proved in an enquiry is with regard to slapping of a co-student by the petitioner. Counsel submits that the petitioner was suspended during pendency of enquiry vide order dt. 04.02.2012 and further punishment under order dt. 13.03.2012 tantamounts to petitioner being subject of to double jeopardy. Counsel submits that the petitioner having already suffered suspension under order dt. 04.02.2012, this Court should set aside the order dt. 13.3.2012 and allow the petitioner to write the examination of the IV Semester of M.S. Green Chemistry starting today i.e. 04.05.2012 as a regular student.

(3.) Mr. Garg, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondent University would however submit that the petitioner's argument with reference to doctrine of double jeopardy is absolutely misdirected, inasmuch as the order of suspension passed on 04.02.2012 was only an interim direction during pendency of the enquiry. He submits that the enquiry has been conducted by a retired Judicial Officer, of the RHJS cadre and the petitioner himself admitted therein his misconduct in resorting to physical violence against a co-student. He submits that no student of the University can be allowed to physically abuse a co-student and the University has zero tolerance in such matters. It has been further submitted that in any event the petitioner is short on attendance consequent to his suspension dt. 04.02.2012 with reference to ordinance 3 of the Examination and Evaluation as promulgated under Sec. 28(l)(g) and Sec. 12 (12)(2)(XIV) of the Central University Act, 2009, which provide that no student shall be permitted to appear in the examination at the end of the Semester unless he has attended as a regular student and studied the course prescribed for the programme with at least minimum 75% attendance/lectures. Counsel also submitted that owing to suspension of the petitioner under order dt. 04.02.2012 neither the petitioner was allowed to nor he did appear in the mid-term examination nor was subjected to internal assessment apart1 from not having completed the requirement of minimum 75% attendance in the programme. In the context aforesaid counsel for the respondent submitted that, the prayer of the petitioner to write the examination of the IV Semester of the course in issue was without force and should be disallowed as also should the prayer for setting aside the order of punishment dt. 13.03.2012 as now modified on 03.05.2012.