Adwait Amrish Goel vs Mukesh Patel School Of Technology ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 7983 Bom

Rane                              * 1/7 *             WP-9889-2017
                                                        10.10.2017


       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

                 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                 WRIT PETITION NO. 9889 OF 2017



Adwait Amrish Goel
Age : 21 years, Occ : Student,
R/o. 1102, Gundecha Premier,
Thakur Village, Kandivali (E),
Mumbai-400 101.                             .....Petitioner


       :VERSUS:


1. Mukesh Patel School of Technology
Management & Engineering
Through its Dean,
Behind Homeopathy College,
Bhakti Vedant Swami Marg,
JVPD Scheme, Vile Parle (W),
Mumbai-400 056.
2. Narsee Monjee Institute of
Management Studies (NMIMS)
Through its Chancellor
V.L. Mehta Road, Vile Parle (W),
Mumbai-400 056.                             .....Respondents




   ::: Uploaded on - 13/10/2017              ::: Downloaded on - 14/10/2017 02:06:00 :::
 Rane                                * 2/7 *                WP-9889-2017
                                                             10.10.2017


                                         -----

Mr. Mihir Desai, Senior Advocate i/by. Mr. Kuldeep U.

       Nikam, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. A.P. Singh i/by. M/s. S.K. Srivastav and Associates,

       Advocate for respondents no.1 and 2.

Ms. Kavita N. Salunke, AGP for respondent no.3.




                CORAM :-            B.R.GAVAI &

                                    SANDEEP K. SHINDE, JJ.

                DATE :-             10TH OCTOBER,    2017.




JUDGMENT (PER CORAM :- SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J) :

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard by

consent.

2. The issue that fell for consideration in this petition is

whether a student could be expelled from the Institute on

account of registration of a crime against him not arising

out and/or in relation to Institute and/or students of

Institute but otherwise. The petitioner claims to be a

meritorious student who had secured 92% marks in the 10 th

Rane * 3/7 * WP-9889-2017 10.10.2017

Standard and 81.4% marks in the 12th Standard

examination. He got admission for the course of B. Tech

(Computer Engineering) in the respondent no.1 Institute.

He cleared his first semester with cumulative grade point

average of 2.94/4 with better performance in the second

semester, third semester and the fourth semester. The

respondent, Institute considering his meritorious career

had nominated him for the TEM Summer School event

which was conducted from June, 26 to 13 th July 2017. On

15th June, 2017 Crime No. 262 of 2017 was registered at

Samta Nagar Police Station under Sections 376(2)(N),

417 , 323 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code wherein it is

alleged that the petitioner committed a sexual assault on

the complainant on the pretext and promise that he would

marry her. It is alleged, promise was turned out to be false,

which prompted her to lodge the subject FIR. The petitioner

was arrested but released on bail on 31 st July, 2017. On 2nd

August, 2017 respondent no.2 suspended him with

immediate effect till further orders which was followed by

Rane * 4/7 * WP-9889-2017 10.10.2017

order dated 5th August, 2017 whereby the petitioner was

expelled from the Institute with immediate effect. The

petitioner is challenging the order dated 2nd August, 2017

and order dated 5th August, 2017 whereby he was

suspended followed by expulsion from the Institute with

immediate effect.

3. Respondent no.2 is the deemed University and it

follows its own Rules and Regulations, then approved by the

Board of Management. The respondent Institute filed

Affidavit-in-reply sworn by Dr. Meena Chintamaneni. In

para-8 of the reply it is stated as under :-

"8. I say that in Clause 2.12.5 of the Student Resource Books provides that students indulged in sexual harassment will also be liable to disciplinary actions as per University norms. Clause 2.15 of the Student Resource Books provides that the Institute shall not tolerate any act of indiscipline, misbehavior, indulgence into unethical practices including possession and consumption of use of drugs, alcoholic drinks, harassment, if any, violence, non-obedience, non-compliance etc. by any student. I crave leave to refer to and rely upon the said Student Resource Book when produced.

 Rane                                      * 5/7 *                 WP-9889-2017
                                                                    10.10.2017

4. Heard Learned Counsel for the petitioner and

learned Counsel for the respondent Institute.

It appears that before expelling the petitioner, he was

not afforded any opportunity either by issuing any show

cause notice or otherwise. The Institute admittedly acted

upon the FIR registered against the petitioner and expelled

him from the Institute obviously without holding any

enquiry. In other words, the petitioner has been punished

and kept away from pursuing the further studies without

hearing him. Thus, the order of the respondent, Institute

was in violation of principles of natural justice. We are also

of the view that, registration of a crime cannot be taken as a

gospel truth and held out to be a foundation to expel the

petitioner. It is not the case of the Institute that the

petitioner has indulged into illegal activities in the campus

in relation to its students and/or Institute. Nodoubt, the

offence registered against the petitioner is serious in

nature, however, the alleged incident was neither

indiscipline, harassment, misbehaviour nor amounting to

Rane * 6/7 * WP-9889-2017 10.10.2017

indulgence in unethical practices as defined in Clause-2.15

of the Students Recourse Book. Respondent no.2 expelled

the petitioner from the Institute merely on the ground that

FIR is being registered against him by the complainant who

is no way concerned with the Institute. In the

circumstances, we are of the view that, the petitioner

cannot be deprived of his career by expelling him from the

Institute. In our view, if the impugned orders are not

quashed, would certainly harm his career, which cannot be

compensated in terms of money or otherwise. The

petitioner cannot therefore be made to suffer the

consequences merely on the basis of the allegations made

against him and that too, before trial. That save and except,

the FIR being registered against the petitioner, there is no

material brought on record by the respondent, Institute to

show that he is required to be dealt in terms of Clause-

2.12.5 of the Students Resource Book as stated in para-8 of

their Affidavit.

5. Thus, in view of the facts of the case and for the

Rane * 7/7 * WP-9889-2017 10.10.2017

reasons stated hereinabove, the order dated 2 nd August,

2017 suspending the petitioner from the Institute and

order dated 5th August, 2017 expelling him from the

Institute are hereby quashed and set aside. Rule is made

absolute in terms of prayer clause (a).

5. Needless to state, that the respondents no.1 and

2 shall permit the petitioner to forthwith resume studies.

Needless further to state that, the respondents no.1 and 2

shall condone the deficiency in attendance, if any, for the

period between the date of the impugned order and the date

on which the petitioner is permitted to resume the studies.

(SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J)                         (B.R. GAVAI, J)