- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
MUHAMMED SAJAD A.K v. THE UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
THURSDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 19TH KARTHIKA,
1944
WP(C) NO. 34466 OF 2022
PETITIONERS:
1 MUHAMMED SAJAD A.K
AGED 19 YEARS
S/O. SHOUKATHALI K, ANDIKNNAN HOUSE, URANGATTIRI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT., PIN - 673639
2 MUHAMMED RASHID E
AGED 20 YEARS
S/O. MUHAMMED ALI E, EDAKKANDI HOUSE, ADAMPADI, MUKKAM, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT., PIN - 673602
3 AFTHAB P.P
AGED 21 YEARS
S/O. ABDULLA P.P, PALAPETTA PUTHANPALLIYALI
HOUSE, PANNIPPARA, EDAVANNA, MALAPPURAM
DISTRICT., PIN - 676541
4 SHAHEEN P.P
AGED 21 YEARS
S/O. YAHYA P.P, PARAPPURATHU HOUSE, OTHAYI, PERAKAMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT., PIN - 676541
BY ADV K.ABOOBACKER SIDHEEQUE
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT
CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O, THENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM
DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR.,
PIN - 673653
2 THE VICE CHANCELLOR
UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O,
THENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT., PIN - 673653
3 SULLAMUSSALAM SCIENCE COLLEGE
AREACODE, UGRAPURAM P.O, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL., PIN - 673639
1
4 THE PRINCIPAL
SULLAMUSSALAM SCIENCE COLLEGE, AREACODE,
UGRAPURAM P.O, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT., PIN -
673639
BY ADV R.RANJITH (MANJERI)
SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN-SC,R.RENJITH MANJERI-R3,4
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 10.11.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
2
JUDGMENT
Even though the petitioners impugn Exts.P5 to P7 orders of the College placing them under suspension, I am of the view that, this Court will not be justified in acceding to the same at this stage.
2. This is because, the allegations against the petitioners are that, they had indulged in the illegal act of ragging their juniors and that certain criminal cases are also pending against them.
3. In fact, Sri.R.Ranjith Manjeri - learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.3 and 4, submitted that the investigation and enquiry into the incident of ragging has been taken forward and that it has now culminated in a report; and he assured this Court that final orders in the said processes will be issued not later than a month from today. He added that, the petitioners need not have any cause for anxiety, since they have already been allowed to write the 5thsemester examinations.
4. However, in response, Sri.K.Aboobacker Sidheeque -
3
learned counsel for the petitioners, submitted that classes for the next semester will commence on 23.11.2022 and hence that further suspension of his clients would be deleterious to them, since they would not obtain necessary attendance in future.
5. It is thus obvious that, on one side, the College says that action against the petitioners is pending; while on the other, the latter asserts that unless they are not allowed to attend the classes, they would loose attendance in future.
6. Obviously, this Court has to find a balance between the rival positions.
7. In the afore perspective, I am certain that this Court will be justified in directing the competent Authority of the College to complete the enquiry into the ragging incident within a short time frame so that, if they are exonerated, then the petitioners can be allowed to attend their classes without delay.
Resultantly:
a. The competent Authority of the College is directed
4
to complete the enquiry, resulting in final proceeding/order and to communicate the same to the petitioners as expeditiously as is possible, but not later than 30.11.2022. b. Depending upon the decision to be taken as afore, the petitioners will be allowed to attend the classes for the next semester immediately thereafter.
c. Needless to say, since, I have not entered into the merits of any of the contentions of the rival parties, all of them are left open, including the ones in support of the challenge to the orders of suspension; leaving liberty to the petitioners to approach this Court again, if so required in future. After I dictated this part of the judgment the learned counsel for the petitioners requested that, while the afore exercise is completed, the competent Authority of the College may also be directed to take into account the fact that the alleged victims have already given statements that his clients were not involved in the incident of ragging and that a case is pending before this Court to quash the criminal proceedings against them.
5
Of course, the College has to take into account all relevant and germane aspects when the afore directions are complied with.
This writ petition is thus ordered.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN,
JUDGE
ACR
6
Exhibit-P11 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION
DATED 01.09.2022 SUBMITTED BY THE 4TH
PETITIONER BEFORE SECOND RESPONDENT.
Exhibit-P12 A TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED
11.10.2022 SWORN INTO BY ONE AL AMEEN
A.K.
Exhibit-P13 A TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED
30.09.2022 SWORN INTO BY ONE ADHIL
K.P.
Exhibit-P14 A TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED
01.10.2022 SWORN INTO BY ONE ADHIL
SALAH C.K.
Exhibit-P15 A TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED
30.09.2022 SWORN INTO BY ONE MUHAMMED
FAYIS.
Exhibit-P16 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR
TRANSFER CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO FIRST
PETITIONER BY FOURTH RESPONDENT.
Exhibit-P17 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR
TRANSFER CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO SECOND
PETITIONER BY FOURTH RESPONDENT.
Exhibit-P18 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR
TRANSFER CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THIRD
PETITIONER BY FOURTH RESPONDENT.
Exhibit-P19 A TRUE COPY THE NOTIFICATION DATED
14.09.2022 ISSUED BY THE FIRST
RESPONDENT.
8
Alert