Calcutta High Court

Prof. Susmita Neogi & Ors vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 14 August, 2024

Author: Rajarshi Bharadwaj

Bench: Rajarshi Bharadwaj

OD-1
                                ORDER SHEET

                      IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                        Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction
                               ORIGINAL SIDE

                                WPO/769/2024
                       PROF. SUSMITA NEOGI & ORS.
                                -Versus-
                    THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.


     BEFORE:
     The Hon'ble JUSTICE RAJARSHI BHARADWAJ
     Date : 14th August, 2024.

                                                                   Appearance:
                                                   Ms. Chama Mookherji, Adv.
                                                     Mr. Anujit Mookherji, Adv.
                                                   Ms. Chandrani Ghosh, Adv.
                                                  Ms. Monisha Chatterjee, Adv.
                                                    Mr. Prithish Chandra, Adv.
                                                                ..for Petitioners

                                    Mr. Amitesh Banerjee, Sr. Standing Counsel
                                                   Mr. Debangshu Dinda, Adv.
                                                                ... for the State.

                                                        Mr. N. Chatterjee, Adv.
                                                        ...for Respondent No.5.

1. The present petitioners are the syndicate members of the University of

Calcutta, professors and non-teaching staff of the said university. The

petitioners have approached this Court owing to the inaction by the

Officer-in-Charge of Jarasanko Police Station, Kolkata in not considering

the complaints dated 02.08.2024 and 05.08.2024 as on both such dates

some unknown persons and outsiders claiming to be students of the

University of Calcutta obstructed the Vice Chancellor from entering the

university campus.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Vice Chancellor of the

University of Calcutta was appointed by the Chancellor and Hon'ble

Governor of West Bengal on 31.05.2023. The Hon'ble High Court upheld

this as a stop-gap arrangement in Sanat Kumar Ghosh v. The Chancellor,

the University of Kalyani & Ors. on 28.06.2023. Moreover, a special leave

to appeal was made before the Hon'ble Supreme Court being SLP (Civil)

No.17403 of 2023, wherein the Apex Court did not interfere with the said

order of the Hon'ble High Court but formed a Search Committee led by

former Chief Justice of India, Justice U.U. Lalit.

3. On 02.08.2024, a syndicate meeting of the University of Calcutta was

called by the Vice Chancellor at around 3.30 p.m. wherein some

unknown persons claiming themselves to be students started protesting

and confined the Vice Chancellor, the petitioners and other officials of the

University in the syndicate room. The outsiders claiming themselves to

be the students blocked the entry to the campus on 05.08.2024. On

06.08.2024, the Vice Chancellor was obstructed from entering the

university campus and discharging her regular public duties and

responsibilities attached to the office of the Hon'ble Chair.

4. Despite complaints, both in writing as well as over mobile phone before

the Officer-in-Charge of Jarasanko Police Station on 02.08.2024 and

05.08.2024, the police took no action, jeopardizing the University's

functioning and students' future.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners relies on judgments in Kurukshetra

University and Anr. v. State of Haryana and Anr. reported in AIR 1977 SC

2229, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that "The Special Leave

Petition filed before us states in Paragraph 18 that after the judgment of

the High Court it has become impossible for the University to maintain

law and order in its campus as the police have been obdurately refusing

to accept any complaint lodged by the University against ex-students and

outsiders who enter the campus at any time of the day and night, and

stay in the hostels without the necessary permission. It is the bounden

duty of the police to record the complaints lodged by the University and

to inquire into them in accordance with law" and in Vijayakumar v. State

of Kerala reported in 2004 (2) KLT 267, wherein it has been held by the

Court that "We are also of the view that students indulging in criminal

activities inside the college campus are liable to be dealt with just like any

other offender and if the situation warrants the police can enter the

college campus without anybody's request or permission in order to

prevent such criminal activities or to take action against persons who

commit criminal offences. No special treatment can be meted out to them

on the ground that they are students or that the offence is committed

inside the college campus. However, considering that the college is a

'temple of learning' any action of the police inside the college campus

shall, as far as possible, be with the knowledge of the Principal. In the

name of strike or agitation or protest the students have no right to

physically attack the Principal or the staff or the other students or to

damage properties of the college."

6. Learned counsel appearing for the University of Calcutta being

respondent No.5 in the instant application, referring to the judgment of

Hon'ble Kerala High Court in Sojan Framcis v. Mahatma Gandhi

University, Kottayam and Ors. reported in (2003) SCC OnLine Ker 176,

contends that institution does not endorse any form of political activism.

Moreover, the students are prohibited from organizing or participating in

any assemblies other than those officially sanctioned. Additionally,

students engaging in strikes are expressly barred from entering the

corridors or the classrooms. It is further submitted that on 06.08.2024, it

was communicated to the Officer-in-Charge, Jorasanko Police Station

vide Memo No. R-Oc(J)2024-2 that certain outsiders were creating

tension and panic to all the stakeholder of the university and were

creating hindrance to the functioning of the University. It was also

mentioned in the said letter that such communication is to be treated as

an F.I.R. However, no actions were taken by the police authority.

7. Referring to the judgment in Sojan Framcis (supra), the respondent No.5

submits that "Once students are admitted to an educational institution

they are bound by the code of conduct laid down by the educational

institutions through the prospects or college calendars and it is implicit

that they should observed the code of conduct necessary for the proper

administration and management of the institution. Restrictions are only

reasonable and designed to promote discipline in the educational

institution so that the objectives of the educational institution could be

achieved and wisdom of laying down those restrictions cannot be

challenged by the students after getting admitted to the educational

institutions".

8. Mr. Banerjee, learned senior standing counsel appearing for the State

files a report. From the report, it can be seen that:-

"On 02.08.2024 at about 21:30 hrs. an information was received from Calcutta University authority that a group of students were opposing a syndicate meeting chaired by the VC inside the C.U. campus and they have sat on demonstration as a result of which the VC and other members of the syndicate meeting could not walk out of their office. On receipt of the complaint, Police from Jorasanko P.S went to the C.U. campus and ensured that there was no law and order problem. Communication was made with both the agitating students and C.U. authority and finally after prolonged discussion, the V.C. came out with other syndicate members from her office and left the C.U. campus in her car peacefully at about 12.05 hrs. Subsequently, on 05.08.2024 at about 15:15 hrs. complaint was received from the Registrar of C.U. that a group of outsiders and some students were showing protest against the V.C. inside the back gate of the campus of C.U. On receipt of the complaint, the Police personnel of Jorasanko P.S. reached at the campus. There was a gathering of students of C.U. who were holding a demonstration at the back gate of the campus against the V.C. The V.C. was sitting in her car and was found not to be confined within the campus. The agitators were giving slogans in support for their charter of demands.

In the meantime the members and supporters of C.U. Employees Association (CUEA) assembled inside the campus to show their support for the V.C. They were shouting slogans for their demands. The group of students and the members and supporters of 'CUEA' were staging protest opposing each other demands. Police personnel showed utmost patience and were engaged to pacify both the groups so that no untoward incident occur which may deteriorate the law & order situation

inside the campus. In case of student agitation special care is given to subside the agitation.

Then communications were made with all the stakeholders including the V.C. and the Registrar of C.U. and finally the V.C. left the campus in her car at about 20:05 hrs. It is pertinent to mention here that Calcutta University has their own private security agency to ensure that no unauthorised persons or outsiders could get access inside the campus.

When Police reached the College Street Campus there was a gathering inside the campus and there was no one to identify who were students and outsiders and it was not possible for police to identify and segregate them. Moreover in case of educational institution Police try to pacify the situation through dialogues and take every possible step so that law and order situation does not go out of hand.

A specific case has been registered over the incident on 05.08.2024 on the basis of complaint of Prof. (Dr.) Debasis Das, Registrar, C.U. against unknown persons vide Jorasanko PS Case no. 145 dt. 07.08.2024 U/S- 126(2)/221/3(5) BNS. Investigation of the case is on progress. However, it is fervently submitted that Officer in Charge of Jorasanko PS, Kolkata is duty bound to strictly comply with any order from Hon'ble High Court, in this regard."

9. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the petition as well as

the report filed by the State. Considering the submission of learned

counsel for the Calcutta University with reference to the judgment in

Sojan Framcis (supra), this Court hereby directs the police authorities to

take immediate and appropriate action to abate any incident of disruption

within the University premises. It is further ordered that no outsider

shall be permitted to enter or engage in activities within the University

premises ensuring maintenance of orderly and conducive educational

environment. Moreover the Vice Chancellor is to conduct all

administrative work in the Darbhanga Building without any interference

from outsiders including ingressing and egressing the University

premises for attending official duties. The University administration is