JUDGMENT (ORAL)

1. The petitioner being a resident student of Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU), has filed the present writ petition in the nature of certiorari seeking quashing of Show Cause Notice dated 23.04.2018 as well as consequent proceedings in the nature of Office Order No. 83/CP/2018 dated 14.05.2018 whereby fine of Rs.6,000/- has been imposed upon her.

2. In the petition, it is claimed that petitioner was pursuing M.A. in Russian Language and Literature and Cultural Studies at JNU after having completed B.A. (Hons.) in the said subjects at the same University from 2014-17. She was also elected as one of the five Councillors in the academic session 2016-17. Petitioner has alleged that respondent No.2 being the Assistant Professor and Chief Proctor of the Respondent No. 1 illegally conducted raids at the women’s hostels against which petitioner and other students raised their protests. It is alleged that the said raids amounted to intrusion of privacy in the women’s hostel. Notably, the incident took place in the evening of 10.10.2017. Petitioner claimed that while she alongwith other students was present at Sabarmati Dabha, Associate Dean Prof. Buddha Singh alongwith some students came at the spot and not only passed uncharitable remarks but also pushed her. Petitioner claims to have filed an FIR regarding the said incident. Petitioner claims that the said incident also led to inquiry being conducted by Chief Proctor resulting in issuance of the Show Cause Notice and passing of the impugned order. It is contended that in the inquiry proceedings, neither the copy of the complaint nor any supporting material in the form of statements recorded were provided to the petitioner. Furthermore, no opportunity was afforded to the petitioner to ask questions to such witnesses. It is submitted that the whole procedure being contrary to the principle of natural justice is not sustainable either under any law or under the ‘Rules of Discipline & Proper Conduct of Students of JNU’ (hereafter, ‘the Rules’).

3. Per contra, respondents, on the other hand, would contend that a complaint dated 11.10.2017, was received from one Rohit Kumar with the allegations of physical assault, manhandling and verbal abuse. In the said complaint, accusations were made against the present petitioner due to which notices were issued to the petitioner and other students named in the complaint and the proceedings were carried out by the Chief Proctor. In the said proceedings, a report was called from Chief Security Office and statements of security guards were also recorded. The petitioner appeared in the said proceedings on 07.11.2017 and admitted to shouting slogans against Associate Dean Prof. Buddha Singh. On verification of the complaint, a Show Cause Notice was issued to the petitioner on 23.04.2018 asking her as to why disciplinary action be not initiated against her. Finding petitioner’s reply to the Show Cause Notice to be unsatisfactory, the impugned order was passed.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents while referring to the Rules, submits that respondents have framed the Rules under Section 5(10) of the JNU Act, 1956 read with Section 32(1) of the Statutes of the University. Petitioner’s conduct falls under Rule (x) in the Category II wherein fine upto Rs.20,000/- can be imposed.

5. From the above submissions and reading of the facts narrated in the petition as well as records of the proceedings produced by the respondent, it appears that the incident occurred in the evening of 10.10.2017. The petitioner claims that she has filed a criminal case resulting into registration of the FIR however, in the present writ petition she confines to the challenge made in the impugned order vide which fine of Rs.6,000/- has been imposed on her. The proceedings were initiated on the complaint of one Rohit Kumar who alleged that in the evening of 10.10.2017 there was confrontation between Associate Dean Prof. Buddha Singh and about 100 students. He attempted to