The requirement of issuing a show cause notice is integral to natural justice and must be adhered to prior to imposing penalties.

JUDGMENT

The petitioner is a student of the B.Pharm Degree course at the Mar Dioscorus College of Pharmacy, Thiruvananthapuram, affiliated to the 1^st respondent. The petitioner challenges Ext.P7 punishment imposed upon him, disqualifying and debarring him from appearing in the 7^th Semester examination of the B.Pharm Degree course as well as the next chance of his examination for the said course.

2. On 25.08.2025, the first supplementary examination of the Seventh Semester B.Pharm Degree course (2020 Admission) was held. During the course of examination, the petitioner was found to be in possession of an eraser containing certain writings. The said eraser was seized and the petitioner was permitted to complete the examination. The petitioner also wrote the remaining examinations on 27.08.2025, 29.08.2025 and 01.09.2025 of the Seventh Semester B.Pharm supplementary Examination.

3. In the meantime, proceedings were initiated against the petitioner by the Malpractice & Examination Lapses Committee (M&LEC) and he was called for a hearing to be held on 27.09.2025. Thereafter, the M&LEC came to the conclusion that the eraser seized from the petitioner amounted to a malpractice as contemplated by law and punitive action was recommended. By Ext.P7 order dated 30.10.2025, the Vice Chancellor granted sanction to implement the punitive action recommended by the M&LEC. The punishment imposed on the petitioner was to disqualify him from appearing in Seventh Semester B.Pharm Degree Examination for the next chance as and when it is conducted, apart from cancellation of his appearance in the whole examination (all subjects) of Seventh Semester B.Pharm supplementary Examination held in August 2025 as per the provisions of Clause I(A)I(1) of Chapter XII of the Examination Manual of the University. The said decision is under challenge in this writ petition.

4. A statement has been filed on behalf of the University pointing out that the malpractice alleged against the petitioner has been practically admitted by him and therefore the punishment imposed, was strictly in tune with the regulations and hence no interference ought to be made.

5. I have heard Sri.Akhil Suresh as well as Sri.P.Sreekumar, the learned Senior Counsel instructed by Sri.G.Ganesh, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents.

6. During the course of hearing, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondents fairly brought to the notice of this Court a decision of a learned Single Bench of this Court in W.P.(C) No. 35570 of 2025, Atlin Jill David v. Kerala University of Health Sciences and submitted that, this Court had interfered with the punishment imposed by the Governing Council of the University for the reason that a show cause notice, as mandated in Chapter VI Statute 3(x) of the Kerala University of Health Sciences First Statutes (for short ‘First Statutes’), had not been issued to the petitioner therein. It was also submitted that the petitioner in the instant case stands on an identical footing as far as this issue regarding failure to issue a show cause notice, is concerned.

7. On a perusal of the judgment inAtlin Jill David’s case (supra), it is evident that this Court had come to the conclusion that the penalty could have been imposed by the University only after issuing a show cause notice under Chapter VI Statute 3(x) Kerala University of Health Sciences First Statutes . The following observations in the said judgment are noteworthy and are as follows:

“6. The next question is whether penalty could have been imposed without issuing show cause notice as mandated in Chapter VI Clause 3(x) of the Kerala University of Health Sciences First Statutes