Disciplinary actions in universities must integrate reformative measures alongside punitive measures to ensure justice and uphold the dignity of students.

JUDGMENT :

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot, J.- The judgment is being structured in the following conceptual framework to facilitate the discussion:

I Introduction & Facts

II Arguments of learned counsels for the parties

III Legal Backdrop to the controversy

IV Anant Narayan Mishra v. Union of India; Mohammad Ghayas v. State of U.P. and others; and Piyush Yadav v. Union of India and others

(a) Directions

(b) Compliance

i UGC : Issuance of notification

ii University: Changes in First Statutes

V UGC Guidelines dated 12.4.2023

- Implementation

VI Historical Perspectives of disciplinary approach in institutions of higher learning

VII Punishment Regimes in first statutes of University, UGC Guidelines & Jurisprudence holding the field

VIII Validity of the impugned orders

IX Conclusions & Directions

X Appendix

I. Introduction & Facts:

2. The issue which arises for consideration in this and the companion writ petitions is the approach to be adopted by universities while dealing with misconduct by students.

3. The petitioner is a student of B.A. (Hons.), Faculty of Arts in the respondent-Banaras Hindu University (hereinafter referred to as the BHU). The petitioner has assailed the order dated 8.10.2022 passed by the Registrar, Banaras Hindu University suspending him for six months from all the privileges of the University and further directing that ''he will not be eligible to appear in his semester examinations in which he is studying''.

4. The recitals in the impugned order dated 8.10.2022 disclose that the petitioner alongwith a large number of students had indulged in marpeet with one student namely Shri Mahendra Patel at Cyber Library.

5. The petitioner has also impugned the order dated 14.11.2022 passed by the Deputy Registrar (Academic), Banaras Hindu University rejecting his representation for revocation of the suspension order.

II. Arguments of the learned counsels for parties

6. Shri Prakhar Saran Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner has made these submissions:

i. The petitioner is a bright academic scholar with a promising future ahead of him.

ii. The petitioner is entitled to an opportunity to reform himself and redeem his reputation in the eyes of his teachers and student community at large (without prejudice to the merits of his case). The university while imposing punishment has adopted an entirely penal approach against the petitioner instead of giving him an opportunity to the petitioner to reform. The University neglected the mandate of Anant Narayan Mishra v. Union of India, 2020(3) ADJ 466; Mohammad Ghayas v. State of U.P. and others, 2019 SCC OnLine All 4774 and Piyush Yadav v. Union of India and others, 2020(5) ADJ 566.

iii. Non compliance of judgments of this Court rendered in Anant Narayan (supra), Mohammad Ghayas (supra) and Piyush Yadav (supra) by the BHU as well as other stakeholders like the UGC not only jeopardizes the future of the coming generations but also strikes at the rule of law.

iv. The impugned orders have been passed in violation of principles of natural justice. There is non application of mind by the university to relevant facts in the record.

v. The punishment is disproportionate to the misconduct alleged against the petitioner.

7. Following submissions has been made by Shri Manish Goyal, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri Vimlendu Tripathi, learned counsels for the BHU:

I. The University is bound by the judgments rendered by this Court in Anant Narayan (supra), Mohammad Ghayas (supra) and Piyush Yadav (supra) and is committed to implement the said judgments in letter and spirit. Further time was sought by the university for complying with the directions of this Court in Anant Narayan (supra), Mohammad Ghayas (supra) and Piyush Yadav (supra).

Note: Time was granted by this Court and the university submitted various affidavits in regard to compliance of directions in Anant Narayan (supra), Mohammad Ghayas (supra) and Piyush Yadav (supra).

II. During the pendency of the writ petition, the University passed an order on 14.