Educational Campuses Can't Be Converted Into Platforms To Propagate Party Politics, There Can't Be Any Compromise On Discipline: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has recently observed that educational campuses cannot be allowed to be converted into political platforms to propagate party politics.

“Discipline in students in educational institutions is of the essence. There can be no compromise in that regard. While there can be no proscription against students engaging in political activities, they cannot be allowed to do so in a manner which would disrupt normal campus life, or the orderly conduct of affairs in the educational institution of which they are a part,” Justice C Hari Shankar said.

The court observed that disruptive activities by students have to be sternly dealt with and there is no room, whatsoever, for sympathy in such cases.

“Failure, on the part of the institution concerned, to follow the sanctified statutory procedure for dealing with such cases results in challenges such as the present, and in the Court having, on the ground of unsustainable breach of the statutory protocol, to set aside the action taken by the institution,” the court said.

It added: “If the student concerned is innocent, that, of course, would be just and fair; on the other hand, if the student is actually complicit in the allegations against her, or him, victory in a judicial battle harbours the pernicious possibility of her, or him, being emboldened to continue such activities.”

Justice Shankar said that if the varsity or institution is serious about instilling discipline in its premises, it has to ensure that inquiries conducted against students suspected of unpardonable indiscipline, and punishments awarded consequent thereto, are in strict compliance with the statutory protocol.

The court made the observations while setting aside the orders passed by the administration of Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) rusticating a PhD student, Swati Singh, and evicting her from the premises of her occupation.

The action was taken after a complaint was received in the office of the varsity's Proctor alleging that Singh misbehaved and manhandled a security staff at the varsity's Convention Centre in August last year.

The court said that it was penning the “advisory note” only because it was the third case in two weeks in which it had to interfere with the punishment awarded to students suspected of seriously disruptive activities only because the concerned University or the institution has been casual about following the statutory protocol in proceeding against the allegedly erring student.

The court directed that Singh be reinstated in JNU and also allotted a hostel for her accommodation.

“This shall, however, not prevent the JNU from proceeding against the petitioner, if it so desires, strictly in accordance with law and in complete compliance with the provisions of Statues governing the JNU,” the court said.

Allowing the plea, the court said that the Office Order whereby JNU decided to rusticate Singh as well as the appellate order were both completely unreasoned.

“They make no reference to the contentions of the petitioner either in her reply or in her appeal, or to the evidence on which the JNU sought to rely to arrive at a finding against the petitioner. There is no prior enquiry report or any other document which could indicate that the decision to confirm the allegations against the petitioner had been arrived at with due application of mind,” the court said.

It added that arriving at a decision that a person is culpable of a particular misconduct or offense without providing to the person the material and the evidence on which the decision is admittedly based amounts to a clear and flagrant violation of the principles of natural justice and fair play.

Counsel for Petitioner: Mr. Abhik Chimni, Mr. Saharsh Saxena, Mr. Anant Khajuria and Ms. Riya Pahuja, Advocates

Counsel for Respondent: Ms. Subhrodeep Saha for Ms. Monika Arora, Advocate