IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V WEDNESDAY, THE 23^RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022 / 4TH PHALGUNA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 2923 OF 2022 PETITIONER/S:

JANEES SWALAH, AGED 20 YEARS, SON OF ABOO SALIH KUTTEERI, KUTTEERI HOUSE, PUKKUTH, PANDIKKAD, POOLAMANNA, MALAPPURAM, ERNAD, KERALA, MALAPPURAM, PIN – 679327 BY ADVS.

P.MOHAMED SABAH SAIPOOJA RESPONDENTS :

1 THE CALICUT UNIVERSITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O, THENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM MALAPPURAM, PIN – 673635. 2 THE VICE CHANCELLOR THE CALICUT UNIVERSITY, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O, THENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM, PIN – 673635

3 THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS THE CALICUT UNIVERSITY, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O, THENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM, PIN – 673635.

4 M.E.S KALLADI COLLEGE MANNARKKAD, PALAKKADU DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL PALAKKAD, PIN – 678583.

5 THE PRINCIPAL M.E.S KALLADI COLLEGE , MANNARKKAD, PALAKKADU DISTRICT, PIN - 678583 6 THE ANTI RAGGING COMMITTEE MES KALLADI COLLEGE, MANNARKKAD, PALAKKADU DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS CONVENER PIN – 678583 BY ADVS.

BABU KARUKAPADATH M.A.VAHEEDA BABU SRI. P.C. SASIDHARAN, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

23.02.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

The petitioner herein, a student pursuing the V Semester B.Com Computer Application course in the M.E.S Kalladi College, Mannarkkad was dismissed from College for allegedly committing the offence of ragging by Ext.P1 order. The said order is under challenge in this writ petition.

2. Brief facts are as under:

The petitioner contends that while he was pursuing his education in the

4th respondent College, a complaint was lodged by a junior student that on 3.12.2021, the petitioner along with one Muhammed Anzil K. committed the offence of ragging. Ext.P1 order dismissing the petitioner was issued by the Assistant Professor in charge of Principal. It is contended that no notice was served on the petitioner before rusticating him and the principles of natural justice were violated. The petitioner would contend that before rusticating the petitioner, the respondents were bound to scrupulously follow the UGC Regulations on Curbing the Menace of Ragging in Higher Educational Institutions, 2009. As per proviso to clause (e) to Regulation 6(3), the enquiry in respect of a ragging incident is to be conducted by an Anti-Ragging Squad by observing a fair and transparent procedure and in full adherence to the principles of natural justice. Opportunity had to be given to the student/students accused of ragging and the other witnesses to place before the Anti Ragging Squad, the documents and views concerning the incident of ragging. A report has to be prepared and the same has to be placed before the Anti Ragging Committee which is to take a decision in terms of Regulation 9 of the UGC Regulations.

3. The petitioner contends that the criminal proceeding registered against the petitioner has been quashed by this Court as per Ext.P2 order based on a settlement arrived at between the petitioner and the victim.

4. It is further contended that the petitioner is now in the V Semester of a course comprising VI Semesters and the ultimate punishment of rustication is excessively grave and disproportionate. It is stated that challenging Ext.P1 order, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P3 appeal before the 2nd respondent which is pending. It is in the afore circumstances that the petitioner is before this Court seeking the following reliefs:

i) Call for the records leading to Ext.P1 order and quash the same by issuing a Writ of Certiorari and re-admit the petitioner into respondent no.4 college.

ii) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or other writs or directions, directing respondent no.5 to permit the petitioner to attend classes and write examinations.

iii) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or other writs or directions, directing respondent no.2 to revoke the exhibit P1 order terminating the petitioner from the college.

iv) Issue a Writ