ROHIT D CRUZ Vs. XAVIERS LABOUR RELATIONS INSTITUTE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ application the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 21.4.2003 issued by respondent no. 3 Dr. E.M.Rao, Dean (Academics) and Professor (PM & IR) Xaviers Labour Relations Institute directing the petitioner to withdraw from the Personnel Management Course and further prayed for re -evaluation of his result after giving consideration to the recommendation of the Member Placement Committee and also permit him to continue his course.

(2.) PETITIONER joined the course of Personnel Management and Industrial Relations (PM and IR) in the Xaviers Labour Relations Institute (in short XLRI) at Jamshedpur in the Academic Session 2002 - 2004 and was allotted Roll No. 37. Petitioner 'scase is that due to the nature of the duties assigned to him by the Committee he missed several classes due to the late hours he had to put in being in the logistic team and would often have to run to the railway station at odd hours, escort company representatives to and from railway stations, hotels, perform hotel bookings, book railway tickets. He thus had to stay up nights from many nights and thus missed classes and was delayed in submitting reports, projects, assignments etc. It is stated by the petitioner while he was undergoing his Summer Internship at Mumbai in the Bombay S.T. Corp. of India he received a letter dated 10.4.2003 under the signature of respondent no.3 whereby he was informed that he had secured "D" grades in four courses and as such he was required to repeat the first year in its entirety, or in the alternative, withdraw from the programme. Petitioner informed respondent no. 3 that he was not satisfied with the grade awarded to him, which was only due to absence from classes. Petitioner requested the respondent -Dean to look into the matter otherwise he would lose a year. Petitioner alleged that he was never informed by the respondent that his absence from classes and delay in submitting projects etc. would be detrimental to his studies. All of a sudden, the impugned letter dated 21.4.2003 was issued by the petitioner informing him that he had secured one more D + grade and as such he is required to withdraw from the programme.

(3.) MR . Delip Jerath, learned counsel for the petitioner assailed the impugned letter issued by the respondents as being illegal and wholly unjustified. Learned counsel firstly submitted that although petitioner requested by letter dated 14.2.2003 for re -evaluation of the papers as he has been victimized on the ground that delay and absence from the courses which was not for his own fault but because of the assessment given to him by the Placement Committee. Learned counsel submitted that the impugned letter is harsh and completely jeopardize petitioner 'seducation career, which is in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution.