The Bombay High Court addressed a writ petition filed by a student of Maharashtra National Law University (MNLU) challenging his expulsion due to repeated allegations of sexual harassment. The court upheld the expulsion, emphasizing both procedural fairness and the proportionality of the punishment. While acknowledging some procedural lapses in issuing a show-cause notice, the court found no grounds to reconsider the findings of the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC), which had recommended expulsion. The court ruled that the penalty of expulsion was proportionate to the student's misconduct, considering that this was a second offense, and concluded that reformation was not possible. Thus, the court dismissed the petition while upholding the university’s disciplinary actions in the interest of campus integrity.

1. Background of the Case:

The petitioner, a student of MNLU pursuing a B.A. LL.B. (Honours) degree, was expelled for repeated sexual harassment. The initial complaint, filed by another student (referred to as "Y"), triggered the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) to investigate the matter, which led to his expulsion.

2. Initial Incident and ICC Report:

The complaint filed on 01/03/2023 involved an incident on 26-27/02/2023. Following an investigation, the ICC submitted its report on 20/05/2023, finding the petitioner guilty for the second time and recommending his expulsion due to lack of reformation after prior warnings.

3. Appeal and Vice Chancellor's Decision:

The petitioner appealed the ICC's decision to the Vice Chancellor, who rejected the appeal but allowed the petitioner to complete his final semester exams out of humanitarian considerations, pending the final outcome of the appeal.

4. Procedural Fairness Challenge:

The petitioner challenged the procedural fairness of the inquiry, claiming he was not given an opportunity to cross-examine witnesses and was not issued a show-cause notice, violating the University Grants Commission (UGC) Regulations, 2015.

5. University's Argument:

The university defended its disciplinary action, stating that the petitioner's repeated misconduct warranted his expulsion. The earlier reformatory measures, including expulsion from the hostel, had failed to correct his behavior.

6. Proportionality of Punishment:

The petitioner argued that the punishment was disproportionate and detrimental to his academic career. However, the court upheld the expulsion, citing the need for strict disciplinary action in cases of repeated misconduct, especially of a serious nature like sexual harassment.

Acts and Sections Discussed:

1. Article 226 of the Constitution of India – Writ jurisdiction to challenge administrative decisions.
2. University Grants Commission (Prevention, Prohibition, and Redressal of Sexual Harassment of Women Employees and Students in Higher Educational Institutions) Regulations, 2015 – Governing procedural requirements for handling complaints of sexual harassment.
   • Clause 8(6) – Mandates the issuance of a show-cause notice before any punitive action.
   • Clause 10(2) – Lists the punishments that can be imposed on students for sexual harassment, including expulsion.

Ratio Decidendi:

1. Procedural Fairness: The court acknowledged that procedural fairness was compromised due to the failure to issue a show-cause notice. However, the petitioner had not raised any contentions regarding the ICC's findings during the appeal process, thus waiving any further procedural challenges.

2. Proportionality of Punishment: Despite the procedural lapse, the court found that the punishment of expulsion was proportionate to the severity of the misconduct, given the petitioner’s prior record of similar offenses and the failure of reformation.

3. Final Consideration: The court prioritized maintaining campus discipline and upholding the integrity of academic institutions while balancing the procedural aspects with the gravity of the offense.

Subjects:

Sexual Harassment, Expulsion, Procedural Fairness, Proportionality of Punishment, UGC Regulations, Campus Discipline, Higher Education.