M Lokesh Babu vs Indian Institute Of Management, Rohtak, Through Its Director And Ors.

Kuldeep Tiwari, J

The present writ petition impugns the order dated 06.01.2025 (Annexure P-26) passed by respondent no. 3, whereby the petitioner was expelled from the Five-Year Integrated Programme in Law conducted by the Indian Institute of Management, Rohtak (hereinafter referred to as the “respondent- Institute”). Moreover, the petitioner seeks a direction to respondent no. 1 to initiate an inquiry into his complaints dated 27.07.2024 and 20.12.2024, which are annexed with the present writ petition as Annexures P-7 and P-21 respectively.

A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, while issuing notice of motion on 14.01.2025, stayed the operation of the impugned order and directed that the petitioner be treated as being on the rolls of the respondent-institute, with all attendant facilities as were available to him at the time of the passing of the impugned order.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, at the time of passing of the impugned order, the petitioner was a student in the fourth year of the said programme. It is further submitted the petitioner is presently a day scholar and subsequent to the passing of the impugned order, the petitioner has maintained exemplary conduct, and no complaint of any nature has been reported against him. Therefore, the impugned order may be set aside, as it is likely to adversely affect the petitioner’s future academic and professional prospects.

Learned counsel appearing for the respondents does not dispute the factual submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner.

This Court has carefully considered the facts and circumstances of the case. Without delving into the legality or merits of the impugned order, and having regard to the supervening events, particularly the fact that the petitioner has successfully completed his fourth academic year with an unblemished record and is presently pursuing the final year of the law programme, this Court is of the considered view that, in order to bring the controversy to a quietus and to ensure that no prejudice is caused to the petitioner, interference with the impugned order is warranted. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and it shall not operate to the detriment of the petitioner in any manner, including with respect to his future academic or professional pursuits

Insofar as the petitioner’s second prayer is concerned, his counsel submits that the petitioner does not wish to pursue his complaints (supra), as he intends to complete his studies peacefully. Consequently, no direction is warranted with respect to the petitioner’s second prayer.

The present writ petition stands disposed of.

Pending application(s) also stand disposed of accordingly.