This writ petition is filed seeking for a direction to the third respondent to allow the petitioner to re-join the third respondent college by considering the representation of the petitioner's father dated 29.08.2016.
2.The petitioner was admitted in the third respondent polytechnic college in three year Diploma course in Mechanical Engineering through later entry scheme by getting himself admitted in the second year. There was a strike in the college on 01.08.2016, in which, several students of the college participated. It is stated that during the strike, the buses belonging to the college were stoned and consequently, they sustained severe damages. By making an allegation that the petitioner is one among the three students, who indulged in such stone throwing, he was sent out of the college by issuing Transfer Certificate.
3.According to the petitioner, he is totally innocent and has not indulged in such violence. It is his case that his name is wrongly included in the complaint given before the police.
4.After notice, the third respondent college represented through their counsel, filed a counter affidavit, wherein it is stated that on 01.08.2016 a mass of students conducted strike against the college and four college buses were attacked by the students also assaulting the driver of the buses. It is further stated that the petitioner herein created a scene and caused trouble at the time of conducting peace committee meeting. It is further stated in the counter affidavit that after conducting enquiry, the third respondent came to know that the petitioner has broken the glasses of the buses by throwing stone, at the time of strike. It is further stated that the disciplinary committee found the petitioner and other two students as the cause for the abovesaid illegal activities and therefore, after conducting a detailed enquiry, the disciplinary committee came to the conclusion that the Transfer Certificate must be issued to the petitioner and other two students. Accordingly, the college issued the Transfer Certificate to the petitioner on 24.08.2016. Thus, it is stated that the petitioner's name is removed from the college attendance register.
5.Heard both sides.
6.It is seen that the petitioner who was a student of the third respondent, was given Transfer Certificate in the middle of the course by contending that he had indulged in an act of violence and caused damage to the college buses during the strike held on 01.08.2016. In support of such action, the college submitted before this Court that the decision to issue Transfer Certificate was taken in pursuance to an enquiry conducted against the petitioner. From the above averments made by the third respondent in the counter affidavit, it is crystal clear that a serious charge is made against the petitioner which also said to have resulted in taking a disciplinary action against him by issuing the Transfer Certificate. Even though the counter affidavit proceeded to project as though an enquiry was conducted against the petitioner, the learned counsel for the third respondent college is not in a position to satisfy this Court by placing and material documents, namely, the show cause notice, charge memo, enquiry notice, enquiry report and findings of the disciplinary committee, to substantive the contention that the action taken against the petitioner was in accordance with the due procedure of law. In the absence of all those material documents, mere averments made in the counter affidavit cannot help the third respondent in any manner, especially when the petitioner has stated that no enquiry was conducted at any point of time. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the action of third respondent college in issuing Transfer Certificate to the petitioner, based on an allegation made against him, without following the due procedure of law, cannot be sustained.
7.Considering the fact that the petitioner is in final year and has to complete the course and considering the fact that the college has not followed the due procedure before taking action against the petitioner, this Court is of the view that the petitioner is entitled to get re-admission into the college so as to complete the course. It is open the third respondent college to take any undertaking from the petitioner and his parents in order to see that the petitioner complete the course without giving room for any complaint in future.
8.Accordingly, this Writ Petition is allowed and the third respondent college is directed to re-admit the petitioner into the Diploma course in Mechanical Engineering by redoing the course commencing from next academic year. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
To
1.The Directorate of Technical Education (DoTE) Sardar petel road, Guindy, Chennai ? 600 025.
2.The Inspector of Police, Melavalavu Police Station, Melur Taluk, Madurai District .