Every Student Has Right To Seek Redressal From Court: Bombay HC Sets Aside Cancellation Of Semester For Two BITS Goa Students Accused Of Theft
The Bombay High Court has set aside the punishment of cancellation of semester imposed on two students of Birla Institute of Technology and Science (BITS), Goa campus, for their involvement in the theft of items from stalls during a conference at the institute.A division bench comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice MS Sonak instead directed the students to do two months...
The Bombay High Court has set aside the punishment of cancellation of semester imposed on two students of Birla Institute of Technology and Science (BITS), Goa campus, for their involvement in the theft of items from stalls during a conference at the institute.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice MS Sonak instead directed the students to do two months of community service at an old age home in Goa.
The court held that the punishment given by the institute was disproportionate and against the University Grants Commission (UGC) guidelines, which emphasize reform over punitive action for student misconduct.
“Every student has the right to seek redressal from the Court of law, and the fact that students might take recourse to Courts of law cannot be a valid consideration not to revisit the penalty imposed by adhering to the UGC guidelines, which emphasises the reformative element,” the court emphasized.
The two BITS Goa students, aged 18, were earlier found involved in the theft of items like chips, chocolates, pens, lamps, etc. from stalls put up during a Genome Engineering conference held at the institute in November 2023.
Based on CCTV footage, the institute's standing committee had cancelled their semester registration and imposed a fine of Rs 2.5 lakhs each. The fine amount was reduced on appeal to the Director, but their semester registration was still cancelled.
The students then approached the Bombay High Court, challenging the punishment. Allowing the petition, the court observed:
"The Director took great pride in informing us that no mercy could be shown to the two 18-year-old petitioners, who admittedly had no history of any delinquency. The Director and Senior Professor issued certain instructions dated 10.01.2024, which instructions were placed on record by Mr Faldessai arguing that "any reduction of punishment, at this stage, will encourage students to seek Court intervention against decisions given by the Institute, undermining the time-tested disciplinary system of the Institute."
“The circumstance that students would approach the Courts against the Director's decision cannot be a legitimate consideration for not tempering justice with mercy," it added.
The court further noted that the UGC guidelines on student misconduct specifically directed institutes to focus on reform rather than punitive action, but this reformative aspect was ignored by BITS Goa.
Citing the guidelines, the court said: "Deviant behaviours among students have several educational implications. The HEls need to avoid such punitive measures to the extent possible and take affirmative action through programs, including taking the services of professional psychological counsellors and promoting wellness through yoga and meditation.”
The court also held that BITS Goa had acted contrary to its own guidelines for penalties in student misconduct cases.
It further said that while Courts normally do not interfere with the quantum of punishment imposed, when penalties imposed are in breach of the guidelines enacted by the Institute itself, it cannot claim any immunity from judicial review.
"The institute has to explain the deviation from its own guidelines and cannot simply rely upon some unfettered discretion claimed by its director in such matters,” the Court said.
Accordingly, setting aside the semester cancellation of the students, it was observed that this was in line with BITS Goa's own guidelines which recommend mandatory community service as a measure for student misconduct. The fine amount was also reduced to Rs. 50,000.