Uttarakhand High Court
Aryansh Singh vs Gb Pant University Of Agriculture And on 6 June, 2025
Author: Ravindra Maithani
Bench: Ravindra Maithani
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Writ Petition No. 2482 of 2024 (M/S)
Aryansh Singh ........Petitioner
Versus
GB Pant University of Agriculture and
Technology and Another ........Respondents
Present:-
Ms. Priyanka Agrawal, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. S.S. Lingwal, Advocate for the respondents, through video
conferencing.
Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)
By means of the instant writ petition, the petitioner seeks
the following reliefs:-
(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari
for quashing the order dated 27.08.2024, passed by the
Registrar of the respondent no.1 university qua the
petitioner, whereby the petitioner has been debarred for
academic year 2023-2024 of B.Tech (Electronics and
Communication) course. (Annexure No.2)
(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of
Mandamus directing the respondents to permit the
petitioner to continue with the 4th year of Btech
(Electronics and Communication) Course from the
respondent university.
(iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of
Mandamus directing the respondents to manually allow
the registration for Semester VII (Academic Year 2024-
2025) as the online portal for the petitioner for accepting
registration is blocked.
(iv) Issue any other writ, order or direction which this
Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper.
(v) Award cost of the petition.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
record.
3. The petitioner is a student of B.Tech in GB Pant
University of Agriculture and Technology University, Pantnagar,
District Udham Singh Nagar. He was found using unfair means in the
examination, therefore, he was debarred from the academic year 2023-
24. It is put to challenge in this writ petition.
4. Pleadings have been exchanged.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the
controversy is squarely covered by the judgment dated 23.03.2017
passed by this Court in the case of Mr. Udit Singh Vs. Vice Chancellor
Govind Ballabh Pant University Pantnagar and Another, 2017 SCC
OnLine Utt 383.
6. This fact is admitted by learned counsel for the
respondents.
7. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned
order dated 27.08.2024 is set aside.
8. Now, the Vice-Chancellor of the university shall afford an
opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and proceed in the matter, as
per the directions contained in Para 17 of the judgment in the case of
Udit Singh (supra), which reads as follows:-
17. Having passed the abovesaid order, this Court not only
would give an opportunity to the Vice-Chancellor but, on the
other hand, would request the Vice-Chancellor to appreciate the
entire case including the report of the University Discipline
Committee and other evidence on record as well as the
statement of the petitioner preferably after giving a personal
hearing to the student and thereafter take a decision in the
matter preferable within two weeks from the date of production
of certified copy of this order. A personal hearing, however,
would not mean that the petitioner would be represented by any
other person, including a lawyer. For abundant precaution, the
petitioner would be permitted to appear in the 2nd semester
classes till the decision is finally taken by the Vice-Chancellor. It
is made clear that this permission to the petitioner to appear in
the second semester classes should not be taken as any
comment on the merit of his case. The Vice-Chancellor must
take a decision on the merit of the case, keeping all aspects into
consideration, including the discipline of the institute.
(Ravindra Maithani, J)
06.06.2025
Ravi Bisht
