Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 67065
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J
J.Chittibabu – Appellant
Versus
University Grants Commission (UGC) – Respondent
W.P.No.25006 of 2025|W.M.P.No.28183 of 2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.J.Saravana Vel
For the Respondents:Mr.R.Rabu Manohar Senior Panel Counsel, Mr.Subramaian Vaidyanathan, Mr.L.Baskaran Government Advocate (Crl.side)
The court emphasized the obligation to enforce anti-ragging laws to prevent student harassment in educational institutions.
Headnote:The judgment analyzes the provisions under the Tamil Nadu Prohibition and Ragging Act 1997, Supreme Court directives against ragging, and UGC Regulations. The petitioner sought redress for the harassment of their late daughter, a victim of ragging in a dental college, resulting in her tragic demise due to mental stress. The court affirmed the responsibility of the third respondent to investigate these violations and mandated appropriate actions against the perpetrators. The court highlighted the seriousness of the case and emphasized the need for accountability and adherence to established anti-ragging protocols. In conclusion, the third respondent is directed to take appropriate action in accordance with the law within a stipulated time frame.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. jurisdiction for mandatory action to address student harassment. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. details of the incident leading to wrongful death. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. failure of college authorities to respond adequately. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. regulatory obligations and consequences of negligence. (Para 8 , 9) |
O R DER
This Writ Petition has been filed for direction directing the respondents 1 to 4 and 7 to take appropriate action against all the persons who had involved in ragging of the petitioner's late daughter Ms.Samyuktha CL in the 5th respondent Institution.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Senior Panel Counsel for the first respondent, the learned counsel for the third respondent and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) for the 7th respondent and perused the materials available on record.
3. The petitioner’s daughter one Samyuktha CL was enrolled in BDS program during the month of September, 2023 in the fifth respondent College. The fifth respondent is affiliated to the 6th respondent deemed to be University. The 6th respondent is recognized by the first respondent. The petitioner's daughter was diagnosed with “Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome” for over 7 years, since 2017. Her condition was invisible disability and she used to have excruciating pain in her pelvis, crippling her day-to-day activities. Therefore, she will experience excruciating pain which she has to endure and it would cause her uneasy walk movements. It was duly informed to the fifth respondent about the sequence of illness of the petitioner’s daughter. While being so, on 25.06.2024, she informed the petitioner that few days back while attending her Prosthodontics lab class, four lab tutors had physically harassed her in front of all the College peers, making derogatory and filthy languages about her way of walk and postures. They had behaved barbarically and continued to harass, humiliate and break her self esteem. Adding to the horrendous activity, they had purposely made her walk 50 times up and down in front of her peers, humiliating and passing derogatory body-shaming slander towards her. Therefore, she sustained pain and mental agony.
4. Therefore, on 26.06.2024, the petitioner and his wife met the Principal and Head of the Department of the Prosthodontics Department of the fifth respondent and informed about the incident that happened to their daughter. The Principal of the fifth respondent, who is also a member of the Tamil Nadu Dental Council assured that action will be taken as against the persons who were involved and were responsible for the ragging of the petitioner's daughter. An enquiry was conducted on 02.07.2024, wherein the Principal of the fifth respondent called the petitioner and confirmed that the incident had happened to the petitioner’s daughter. On 03.07.2024, when the petitioner’s daughter went to meet the fifth respondent, she was surprised that all the faculties including the Vice President and several heads of the department were present. However, the petitioner or his daughter was not informed about the enquiry. She was made to wait till 01.30 p.m and it caused stress and she was again subjected to severe mental trauma. She was victimised and harassed in the name of general enquiry for giving a complaint. Due to the mental stress, she passed away due to cardiac arrest, on 26.07.2024.
5. Thereafter, the petitioner along with his family members went to the fifth respondent and asked about the enquiry report which was conducted on 03.07.2024. The petitioner was informed that two months salary of the Lab Tutors were withheld and no other action has been taken against them. Therefore, the petitioner had sent an e-mail and a registered post of the complaint to the respondents 1 to 7 herein.
6. A perusal of the status report submitted by the 7th respondent revealed that on receipt of the complaint, the 8th respondent had conducted enquiry and closed the complaint, on the ground that during the enquiry, the victim
