Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, students of Mukesh Patel School of Technology, Management and Engineering (Respondent No.2), which is managed by Shri Vile Parle Kelwani Mandal (Respondent No.1) and affiliated to Narsee Monjee Institute of Management Studies Deemed University (Respondent No.3), challenged a communication dated 22nd November 2016 debarring them from appearing in their examinations and an order dated 31st January 2017 passed by the Dean of Respondent No.3. The petitioners had been admitted to various courses in the academic year 2015-2016 but failed to pass their examinations and were required to appear for additional examinations. The results of the additional examinations were declared on or about 5th August 2016, and the petitioners again failed. According to the petitioners, they had to enroll to the course only after the results were declared and therefore missed lectures. The respondents debarred the petitioners from appearing in their examinations without affording them an opportunity of hearing. The court considered whether the impugned communication and order were sustainable in law. The court held that the impugned orders violated principles of natural justice as the petitioners were not given a chance to explain their case before being debarred. The court set aside the debarment orders and directed the respondents to permit the petitioners to appear for their examinations. The court also directed that the petitioners be allowed to continue their studies and that the respondents shall not take any coercive action against them.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Right to Education - Debarment from Examination - Principles of Natural Justice - The petitioners, students of a deemed university, were debarred from appearing in their examinations without being afforded an opportunity of hearing - The court held that the impugned orders violated principles of natural justice as the students were not given a chance to explain their case before being debarred - The court set aside the debarment orders and directed the respondents to permit the petitioners to appear for their examinations (Paras 1-32).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the impugned communication debarring the petitioners from appearing in their examination and the order of the Dean are sustainable in law, particularly in the absence of an opportunity of hearing being afforded to the petitioners.
Final Decision
The court allowed the writ petitions, set aside the impugned communication dated 22nd November 2016 and the order dated 31st January 2017, and directed the respondents to permit the petitioners to appear for their examinations. The court also directed that the petitioners be allowed to continue their studies and that the respondents shall not take any coercive action against them.
Law Points
- Natural Justice
- Audi Alteram Partem
- Right to Education
- Debarment from Examination
- Opportunity of Hearing
Case Details
Writ Petition (L) No.444 of 2017, Writ Petition (L) No.621 of 2017, Writ Petition (L) No.674 of 2017, Writ Petition (L) No.678 of 2017
Shantanu S. Kemkar, Prakash D. Naik
Mr. Mihir Desai, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Sarnath Sariputta Pramod for Petitioner in Writ Petition (L) No.444 of 2017; Mr. Uday Warunjikar with Mr. Omkar C. Geedh for Petitioners in Writ Petition (L) Nos.621/2017, 674/2017 and 678/2017; Ms. Manorama Mohanty with Mr. A.P. Singh i/by M/s. S.K. Srivastava & Co. for Respondent nos.1 to 3 in all writ petitions
Anirudh Devansh, Pranav Hajirnis, Rubin Jhambani, Shivam Mahana
Shri Vile Parle Kelwani Mandal, Mumbai; Mukesh Patel School of Technology, Management and Engineering, Mumbai; Narsee Monjee Institute of Management Studies Deemed University, Mumbai
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging debarment from examination.
Remedy Sought
Petitioners sought to set aside the communication dated 22nd November 2016 debarring them from appearing in examinations and the order dated 31st January 2017 passed by the Dean, and to be permitted to appear for their examinations.
Filing Reason
Petitioners were debarred from appearing in their examinations without being afforded an opportunity of hearing.
Issues
Whether the impugned communication and order debarring the petitioners from appearing in examinations are sustainable in law?
Whether the principles of natural justice were violated by not affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners before debarring them?
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners argued that they were not given any opportunity of hearing before being debarred from examinations, violating principles of natural justice.
Respondents contended that the debarment was justified due to the petitioners' failure to meet academic requirements.
Ratio Decidendi
The impugned orders debarring the petitioners from appearing in examinations were passed without affording them an opportunity of hearing, thereby violating the principles of natural justice. Hence, the orders are unsustainable in law.
Judgment Excerpts
The Petitioners in all these petitions have raised a common issue and hence the petitions are disposed of by common judgment and order.
The Petitioners have invoked writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and have challenged the communication dated 22nd November 2016 issued by Respondent no.2 debarring them from appearing in their examination as well as the order dated 31st January 2017 passed by the Dean of Respondent no.3.
Procedural History
The petitioners filed writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the debarment communication dated 22nd November 2016 and the Dean's order dated 31st January 2017. The court reserved judgment on 21st March 2017 and pronounced it on 13th April 2017.
Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India: Article 226
