SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

MADRAS HIGH COURT (DB)(Madurai Bench)
R. Sudhakar and V.M. Velumani, JJ.
S. Thirumani & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
State of Tamil Nadu, The Director of Legal Studies, Directorate of Legal Studies - Respondent
Writ Appeal (MD) Nos. 892 and 990 of 2015 and M.P.(MD) Nos.1, 1, 2 and 3 of 2015
Decided On : 30-10-2015

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants :Mr. R. Alagumani, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mr. V.R. Shanmuganathan, Special Government Pleader.

Headnote:

Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 354 D - Women Harassment Act, 1998 - Section 4 - Information Technology Act, 2008 - Section 67 - Warden - Vulgar And Obscene Messages - Girl students in ladies hostel were checked-up and searched to find out whether any student is having mobile phone in hostel - Mrs. Krishna Leela, Assistant Professor/Deputy Warden of ladies hostel of College, exceeded her limit, by searching girl students, by removing their dress in front of other students - Entire college staged protest against Mrs. Krishna Leela, in a democratic way, for two days, condemning the atrocious activities of Assistant Professor/Deputy Warden - Appellants also participated in the said protest - Appellants and other students came to know that somebody has sent obscene messages to Mrs. Krishna Leela, Assistant Professor/Deputy Warden, through mobile phone - She gave a complaint - Appellants and other two students, Were Dismissed And filed W.P – Held, Appellants and others are not eligible for such leniency - Judgment relied on by learned counsel for appellants is not applicable to facts of present case - In present case, appellants and others have conspired together and sent vulgar and obscene messages and made phone calls, threatening Mrs. Krishna Leela, Assistant Professor/Deputy Warden, their own teacher - They have deliberately committed serious misconduct, when their teacher only tried to shape character of her students, so that they can be successful and shine in their profession - Learned Single Judge has elaborately dealt with meaning of "Guru" and their status – Court is in entire agreement with view of learned Single Judge - In view of serious misconducts deliberately done by appellants and others against their Professor, second respondent has rightly imposed punishment, by expelling them from College - In view of facts referred to above and seriousness of misconduct committed by them, court find there is no reason to modify punishment - There is no infirmity in order passed by learned Single Judge, warranting our interference – Petition Dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

V.M. Velumani, J.

These writ appeals have been filed challenging the order dated 10.07.2015, made in W.P.(MD) Nos. 4742 and 4740 of 2015.

2. Since common issues are involved in both the writ appeals, they are heard together and disposed of by this common Judgment.

3. The case of the appellants:

(i) The appellants and two other students, viz., N. Sivaguru and M. Palanisamy, were studying III year in five years B.A., B.L., Degree course at Government Law College, Trichy. They were extending their support to the students, whenever they went on protest for the interest of students as well as for the interest of the Society and participated in those protest.

(ii) Girl students in the ladies hostel were checked-up and searched to find out whether any student is having mobile phone in the hostel. Mrs. Krishna Leela, Assistant Professor/Deputy Warden of the ladies hostel of the College, exceeded her limit, by searching girl students, by removing their dress in front of other students. The entire college staged protest against Mrs. Krishna Leela, in a democratic way, for two days, i.e., on 15.10.2014 and 16.10.2014, condemning the atrocious activities of the Assistant Professor/Deputy Warden. The appellants also participated in the said protest.

(iii) The appellants and other students came to know that somebody has sent obscene messages to Mrs. Krishna Leela, Assistant Professor/Deputy Warden, through mobile phone. She gave a complaint on 14.09.2014 and the same was registered in Crime No. 65 of 2014, on the file of Cantonment All Women Police Station, Trichy, on 10.11.2014.

(iv) The appellants were not aware of the FIR registered against some persons, for the alleged occurrence, that took place in the intervening night of 13.09.2014 and 14.09.2014. The appellants were regularly attending classes. S. Thirumani [Appellant in W.A.(MD) No. 892 of 2015] came to know that his Roommates, viz., A. Saravana Bava [Appellant in W.A.(MD) No. 990 of 2015] and Palanisamy were arrested on 17.12.2014 at the College gate and produced before the learned Judicial Magistrate No. II, Trichy, and remanded to judicial custody. Subsequently, they were released on bail. Thereafter, it came to be known that they were arrested on the allegation that somebody sent obscene messages to Mrs. Krishna Leela, using the mobile phone of Palanisamy, roommate and friend of Sivaguru and Saravana Bava [Appellant in W.A.(MD) No. 990 of 2015].

(v) N. Sivaguru, a Roommate, confessed that he only sent the controversial messages and made phone calls to Mrs. Krishna Leela, Assistant Professor/Deputy Warden. While so, a show cause notice, dated 02.02.2015, was issued to the appellants, Palanisamy and Sivaguru, calling upon them to submit their explanations within 48 hours. After getting extension of time, they submitted their explanations on 12.02.2015.

(vi) The second respondent without conducting any enquiry and without affording any opportunity to the appellants and two other students, dismissed the appellants and others, by order dated 06.03.2015. The said order is arbitrary and passed in violation of the principles of natural justice. In such circumstances, the appellants and other two students, viz., N. Sivaguru and M. Palanisamy, filed W.P.(MD) Nos. 9323 and 4740 to 4742 of 2015, seeking to quash the said order of dismissal from the College and direct the respondents to re-admit them in III year B.A., B.L. Degree course in the academic year 2014-2015, in the second respondent College and allow them to continue their studies.

4. The case of the respondents:

(i) The second respondent filed common counter affidavit in all the four writ petitions. Mrs. Krishna Leela, Assistant Professor/Deputy Warden, got an information that two students, viz., Ms. Vaisnavi and Ms. Radhika, III year B.A., B.L., Degree course, were using mobile phones, on 11.09.2014. Their parents were asked to meet the Principal of the College on 12.09.2014. In the meeting, it was found that the mobile phone, wh
































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top