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

2023 Supreme(Telangana) 434

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
SUREPALLI NANDA, J.
Thallapally Saideep – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana & others - Respondents
Writ Petition No.24008 of 2023
Decided on : 29-11-2023

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr.Mohd. Azhar

A student cannot be rusticated without providing an opportunity of being heard and without following the principles of natural justice.

Headnote:

RUSTICATION - FORESTRY STUDENT - TSPSC EXAM LEAK - NATURAL JUSTICE - PRINCIPLES - VIOLATION - WRIT PETITION - ALLOWED: 1. Rustication of a student without providing an opportunity of being heard and without following the principles of natural justice is arbitrary and illegal. 2. A student cannot be rusticated based on a preliminary report of an investigation team without a final determination of guilt by a competent judicial forum. 3. The impugned rustication order issued by the Forest College and Research Institute, Mulugu, is set aside.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a Ph.D. student at the Forest College and Research Institute, Mulugu, was rusticated from the college for his alleged involvement in the TSPSC exam paper leak. The rustication order was issued without providing any opportunity to the petitioner to explain his side of the story or to defend himself against the allegations.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the rustication order was arbitrary and illegal as it violated the principles of natural justice. The court noted that the petitioner was not given any opportunity to be heard before the rustication order was issued and that the order was based on a preliminary report of an investigation team without a final determination of guilt by a competent judicial forum.

Issues: 1. Whether the rustication order was issued in violation of the principles of natural justice? 2. Whether the petitioner was given a reasonable opportunity to defend himself against the allegations?

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the following principles of natural justice: 1. Audi alteram partem (hear the other side): No one should be condemned unheard. 2. Nemo judex in causa sua (no one should be a judge in his own cause): A person cannot be both the accuser and the judge. 3. The right to a fair hearing: This includes the right to be informed of the allegations against you, the right to present evidence and arguments in your defense, and the right to cross-examine witnesses.

Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petition and set aside the impugned rustication order. The court also observed that it was open to the respondents to proceed afresh in the matter if they intended to do so, but they had to follow the principles of natural justice and provide a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner to defend himself.

ORDER :

Heard Mr Mohd. Azhar, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Education appearing on behalf of the 1st respondent, learned Government Pleader for Forest appearing on behalf of the 2nd respondent and the learned Government Pleader for Services-I.

2. This Writ Petition is filed to issue a Writ of Mandamus declaring the actions of the respondent No. 3, in rusticating the petitioner by issuing rustication notice vide Rc. No. 166/2019/A4(ii) dated 14.07.2023 until further orders from Ph.d Forestry (Department: Forest resource Management) without calling for any explanation or show cause as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, excessive, against principles of natural justice, violative of articles 14, 21 of constitution of India and consequently set aside/quash the rustication notice vide Rc. No. 166/2019/A4(ii) dated 14.07.2023 and direct the respondent No.3 to allow the petitioner to appear in the Ph.D (Forestry) course.

3. The case of the Petitioner as per the averments made by the petitioner in the affidavit filed by the petitioner in support of the present Writ Petition in brief, are as follows:

a) The petitioner is a Ph.D student and got enrolled in the 3rd respondent college in the Forest Resource Management vide Admission No. MFP 22-05. After joining in the college, the petitioner was framed in an unrelated crime No. 95/2023 before the PS CCS DD SIT as Accused No. 82 based on the confession of some other accused and his vague allegation that the petitioner has allegedly helped him in cracking answers for AEE & DAO Examination conducted by TSPSC through Chatgpt and hence the petitioner was arrested and remanded to judicial custody from 13.07.2023 to 27.07.2023.

b) While the petitioner was in judicial remand, the 3rd respondent college on 14.07.2023 issued a notice vide Rc. No.166/2019/A4 (ii) stating that the petitioner is being rusticated from the college for the offence committed in connection with the TSPSC paper leakage and malpractice; and arrest by the Special Investigation team probing the TSPSC exam question paper leak on 12.07.2023 and the disciplinary committee of the college in its meeting on 14.07.2023 after detailed deliberations has recommended to rusticate the petitioner from the FCRI till further orders. Aggrieved by the same, W.P No. 21616 of 2023 has been filed and the same is pending for adjudication.

c) While things stood so, on 23.08.2023 a circular was issued by the Controller of Examinations and the 3rd respondent directing the students to collect their hall ticket for the exams to be conducted from 29.08.2023 to 02.09.2023 and the petitioner’s hall ticket was not issued citing the impugned rustication. However, the petitioner through e-mail dated 23.08.2023 has requested the 3rd respondent to allow the petitioner to appear for the examinations while the rustication is pending further orders, but there was no response for the same.

d) Moreover, no opportunity was provided to the petitioner to present his explanation and directly a draconian rustication is issued by citing that the petitioner was involved in the TSPSC paper leak and malpractice while the petitioner himself had never appeared for TSPSC AEE & DAO Exam, much alone be involved in the malpractice.

e) As per the Regulations of the Post Graduate Courses which are applicable to the petitioner, no such action either under 10.3.7 was taken or even as per 10.3.8 no action was initiated by the respondents. Aggrieved by the impugned rustication notice vide Rc.No.166/2019/A4(ii) dated 14.07.2023 of the respondent No.3, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

4. Counter Affidavit filed by the Respondent No. 3 in brief is as under:

a) The 3rd respondent college is affiliated to Sri Konda Laxman Telangana State Horticulture University, Mulugu and the Regulations issued by the Sri Konda Laxman Telangana S

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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