Issuance of writ of mandamus to principal of a college.

This is an application for issuing a writ of mandamus directing the Principal of the Pachiappa’s College to re-admit the petitioner to the Final year Economics Honours class.

The petitioner was a student of the final year Economics Honours Class in the Pachiappa’s College, Madras. In 1949, he had been expelled from the hostel attached to the Pachiappa’s College on 24 hours’ notice. The Principal says that he had to be expelled because of his improper behaviour. The petitioner affirms that he was wrongfully expelled from the hostel because he complained to one of the trustees about the scarcity of water in the bath room and the enhancement of the mess rate. On 19th July, 1950, the Principal wrote a letter to the petitioner’s father informing him that his son’s behaviour had not shown any improvement even at the beginning of the year. He complained to him of a specific instance namely, that when he was getting up the stair case, the petitioner in the presence of about 50 students mentioned in the most contemptuous language “What does it matter if the Principal comes.” To this letter, the petitioner’s father replied on 21st July, 1950, wherein he complained that his son was expelled from the hostel for a small mistake and that consequently he had to spend large amounts. He appealed to him to treat his son as his son and to permit him to continue his studies. On 12th July, 1951, about 4p.m., an incident took place at the office room of the college. As to what happened at that place, there are conflicting versions. The petitioner’s version is: On 12th July, 1951, at about 4p.m., he asked the clerk of the college to give him a railway concession form for students to obtain his season pass to travel by electric train to reach the college. The clerk concerned informed him that forms could be issued only between 1-30p.m. and 3p.m. At 4-30p.m., the petitioner saw the clerk issuing the said forms to other students. He went into the office room and asked the clerk why he made this discrimination. The clerk assumed a haughty attitude and indulged in threatening and abusive language and said that he could do what he wanted and might even take the matter to the President of the Trust Board. He replied that he was not so childish as to report this silly matter to the President. Just then the Principal stepped in and the position was eased with the result that the Principal himself got a form for him the next day with which he purchased the ticket. The Principal gives an entirely different version of what took place that day. According to him what happened was this. On 12th July, 1951, at 3-15p.m., the petitioner went to the college to apply for South Indian Railway Concession form from the clerk concerned. He asked the petitioner to come for the forms in the hours stipulated therefor. On hearing this, the petitioner flared up at once and abused the clerk and created a scene. The Head clerk then asked the petitioner not to create any scene but to bring the matter to the notice of the Principal and thereupon the petitioner had talked disparagingly about the Principal. When the Head clerk asked the petitioner to report the matter to the President of the Trust Board, he abused in vulgar language the President of the Trust Board, the Principal and the other members of the management. When he returned to his room at 3-30 p.m., he found the petitioner coming into the office room shouting. Then he took him to his office room and asked him the reason for his unseemly behaviour. He complained about the partiality of the office staff and talked in disrespectful and contemptuous language against the management and he had to ask him to go away. In the reply affidavit the petitioner denied that he called the respondent and the members of the management all sorts of names in indecent language or that he indulged in behaviour not worthy of a student. The version given by the Principal is supported by the affidavit filed by Gopala Chetty, despatching cl