'Drastic Impact On Career': High Court Imposes ₹2 Lakh Cost On IIM Rohtak For Withholding Result Of Student For Four Years

The Punjab & Haryana High Court has imposed an exemplary cost of Rs.2 lakh on the Indian Institute of Management (IIM) Rohtak for illegally withholding the result of a student for 4 years.

Justice Jasgurpreet Singh Puri said, "The petitioner is a young girl and was of 27 years at the time when the impugned order was passed and she could not do anything for the next four years because of the aforesaid order which was passed without the authority of law. It has seriously affected her career and studies apart from other incidental consequences. Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the action of the respondent-Institute being ex facie illegal and without the authority of law which resulted in having a drastic and adverse impact upon the career of a young student, the petitioner deserves exemplary costs in the nature of compensation which are assessed as Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lacs only) which shall be paid to the petitioner by the respondent-Institute within a period of three months from today."

The plea was filed by a student of the post-graduation course of batch 2018-2020, seeking quashing of the order wherein action was taken against her by IIM Rohtak, directing them to repeat the final semester. It also sought directions to declare the result of the final semester exam held in 2020.

It was submitted that the student had alleged that sexual harassment had been committed against her by a student and officials of the university. However, the Internal Complaint Committee found that the complaint was false.

Later, the Institute passed an order referring to the rules of the Academic Handbook and directed the petitioner to repeat Term 6 of the PGP course and also with a direction to tender an apology.

Counsel for the petitioner submitted that after the order of punishment was passed, the result of the petitioner for the 6th Trimester was not declared by the respondent-Institute and in this way, more than four years have elapsed.

It was stated that the petitioner, who is a student, has not been able to pursue her further studies or apply for any job and her entire career has been spoiled by the respondent-Institute because of the passing of the impugned order which is not only illegal and erroneous but also without the authority of law.

After hearing the submissions, the Court without going into the merit of the enquiry pertaining to allegations of sexual harassment made by the petitioner, found that the action of the Institute was illegal.

"There is no provision for any kind of punishment of Clause 7.5.3 under which the punishment has been inflicted whereas the same exists only in the later Academic Handbook i.e. for Batch- 10 for the year 2019-2021. Therefore, the punishment which has been inflicted upon the petitioner in terms of the Clause 7.5.3 is totally without the authority of law and without any power," said the judge.

Justice Puri highlighted that the order was passed without the authority of law and more than four years have elapsed that the petitioner was not able to apply for any job or pursue her further studies thereby jeopardising her career.

Consequently, the Court imposed an exemplary cost of Rs. 2 Lakh on IIM Rohtak and said if the "costs are not paid to the petitioner within the aforesaid period, then she will be entitled to interest @ 9% per annum thereafter."

"As a consequence, the respondents are also directed to expedite the process of declaring the result of the petitioner forthwith and also expedite the process of granting the degree in accordance with law," added the Court.

Mr. Naveen Siwach, Advocate for Mr. J.S. Saneta, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Jatin Kaushal, Advocate for Mr. Arvind Seth, Senior Panel Counsel, for respondent No.1-UOI.

Mr. Vivek Singla, Advocate, for respondents No.2 & 3.

Title: XXX v. Union of India and others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 181

Click here to read/download the order