AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
M. Jaichandren, J.—Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Counsels appearing for the respondents.
By consent of the parties, the writ petition is taken up for final hearing and disposal.
The affidavit filed in support of the writ petition has been filed by the father of the petitioner, who is an Engineering student of the first respondent
College, who had been admitted in the First Year B.E. (E.E.E.) Course, on 5.9.2008. Since the first respondent College had not provided all the
facilities to its students to pursue the courses offered by the College, some of the students had protested. Thereafter, a notice had been served on
the petitioner directing him to appear for an enquiry, on 28.11.2008, along with his parents. The petitioner had been informed that an Enquiry
Committee had been appointed to enquire into the matter, on 28.11.2008. However, based on a preliminary enquiry report, the petitioner had
been suspended from the College, with effect from 21.11.2008.
It has been further stated that certain charges had been levelled against the petitioner, including the charge relating to the missing library books.
Even though the petitioner had sent a detailed reply, dated 28.12.2008, to the show cause notice, dated 20.12.2008, issued by the first
respondent College, the impugned proceedings, dated 29.12.2008, had been issued by the first respondent College, dismissing the petitioner from
the College. In such circumstances, the petitioner had preferred the present writ petition before this Court, under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India.
The main contention of the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner is that the petitioner had been dismissed, by the impugned
proceedings of the first respondent College, dated 29.12.2008, without considering the explanation, dated 28.12.2008, submitted by the
petitioner. The impugned proceedings, dated 29.12.2008, had been issued, without an enquiry being conducted and without giving the petitioner
an opportunity to put forth his case.
At this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had submitted that it would suffice if the
first respondent College is directed to issue the Transfer Certificate to the petitioner, along with the other certificates submitted by the petitioner at
the time of his admission in the first respondent College
Per contra, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the first respondent College had submitted that the petitioner had been dismissed from
service following the recommendations made by the Final Enquiry Committee. The petitioner was dismissed from the College due to the illegal
activities of the petitioner and in order to maintain strict discipline, within the College campus and to ensure that the other students are not
influenced to participate in such illegal activities. The learned Counsel had also submitted that the first respondent College would issue the Transfer
Certificate to the petitioner, without any adverse remarks and would also return all the other certificates submitted by the petitioner at the time of
his admission in the College. However, there is no provision to return the fees paid by the petitioner, to the first respondent College, at the time of
his admission in the First Year B.E. (E.E.E.) Course.
In view of the submissions made by the learned Counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioner, as well as the respondents, the first respondent
College is directed to issue the Transfer Certificate to the petitioner, along with the other certificates submitted by the petitioner at the time of his
admission in the College, within a period of ten days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Accordingly, the writ petition stands closed,
with the above directions. No costs. Consequently, connected writ petition miscellaneous petition is closed.