Court No. - 33
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 8016 of 2018 Petitioner :- Anubhav And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Virendra Singh Parmar,Sudhir Kumar Singh Parmar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Rakesh Kumar Mishra
Hon'ble Manoj Misra,J.
Ref: Amendment Application No. NIL of 2018
By this amendment application, the applicant has prayed for amendment in the prayer of the petition so that an additional prayer in respect of challenge to the impugned order dated 02.11.2017 be also incorporated.
The amendment application is allowed.
Let necessary amendment be carried out within a period of 48 hours. Office shall assign a number to the amendment application.
Order Date :- 27.2.2018 Sunil Kr Tiwari
Court No. - 33
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 8016 of 2018 Petitioner :- Anubhav And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Virendra Singh Parmar,Sudhir Kumar Singh Parmar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Rakesh Kumar Mishra
Hon'ble Manoj Misra,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners; Sri Rakesh Mishra for the respondents 2 and 3; and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent no.1.
The petitioners had indulged in throwing brickbats and exhibiting violent behaviour in the campus of the institution which was captured in a cctv footage. An Enquiry Committee comprising of five members including a retired Judge of this Court was constituted. Before the Enquiry Committee, the petitioners had submitted application tendering apology after pleading guilty. The Enquiry Committee took a lenient view against the petitioners by recommending suspension for only one session whereas some students, who had participated in the incident, have been expelled.
A perusal of the enquiry report, which is at page 41 of the paper book, would reveal that cctv footage had clearly disclosed participation of the petitioners in an incident of throwing brickbats and destroying property of the institution.
Pursuant to the recommendation made by the Enquiry Committee, the impugned order dated 02.11.2017 was passed.
As the petitioner has not been able to demonstrate that he had not participated in the incident and in fact he had admitted his guilt before the Enquiry Committee, this court finds no good reason to interfere with the order passed by the institution.
The petition is dismissed.
Order Date :- 27.2.2018 Sunil Kr Tiwari