State Must Frame Stringent Law Providing Severe Punishment For Ragging Activities In Educational Institutions: Kerala High Court
The Kerala Excessive Court docket has emphasised that the State should body a stringent legislation offering extreme punishment for ragging actions in academic establishments.
The Court docket emphasised thus in two Writ Petitions out of which one was filed by the Dean of the School of Veterinary and Animal Sciences of the Kerala Veterinary and Animal Sciences College (KVASU), who was additionally the Warden of the Males’s Hostel of KVASU.
A Single Bench of Justice D.Okay. Singh noticed, “This Court docket is of the view that although the UGC Anti-ragging Laws are stringent, they haven’t deterred the unruly behaviour and conduct of the scholars. The Laws are usually not sufficient to curb the ragging exercise in its entirety. The State, due to this fact, should body a stringent legislation offering extreme punishment for ragging actions in academic establishments to cease this menace in order that no different scholar loses his/her life for the unruly, rowdy conduct by the undisciplined college students. The State shall additionally make it possible for the responsible discovered doesn’t go unpunished.”
Advocates P.C. Sasidharan and Sneha M.S. appeared for the Petitioners whereas Senior Advocates P. Sreekumar, George Poonthottam, Senior Authorities Pleader (SGP) Premchand R. Nair, Standing Counsel S. Prasanth, Manu Govind, and Advocate Nisha George appeared for the Respondents.
Transient Information
One scholar specifically Sidharthan J.S., a second-year BVSc and AH course of the School, aged round 21 years as on the date of the incident, was discovered hanging within the rest room of the dormitory of the Undergraduate Males’s Hostel within the School Campus on February 18, 2024. The grievance and knowledge obtained from some college students on the School by the UGC Anti-ragging helpline was transmitted to the Dean of the school, with a replica to the Vice Chancellor. An anti-ragging squad of the School investigated the case, and its report confirmed that the deceased scholar was subjected to brutal bodily abuse and public trial by a bit of scholars, which amounted to ragging. The report of the anti-ragging squad confirmed his ragging, holding the Dean and the Assistant Warden accountable for administrative lapses and failure in observing the Guidelines and Laws prohibiting ragging in Greater Training Establishments.
Accordingly, the Vice-Chancellor (VC) known as for an evidence from Dr. M.Okay. Narayanan and Dr. R. Kanthanathan i.e., the Petitioners, who had been the Dean and the Assistant Warden respectively, having speedy duty to make sure the correct behaviour and preserve self-discipline of the hostel inmates. A 3-member Inquiry Committee was constituted by the VC of the College to inquire into the alleged administrative lapses on the a part of the Petitioners, resulting in the dying of the scholar. Because the replies by them weren’t passable to the VC, orders had been issued to position them below suspension. The Committee concluded that the Petitioners failed to supply a safe and secure campus life for the scholars. The Chancellor appointed Justice A. Hariprasad (former Choose of Kerala Excessive Court docket) because the Fee of Inquiry, who held accountable the VC, in addition to the Petitioners.
Reasoning
The Excessive Court docket in view of the above information, stated, “… on the spacious grounds taken by the College based mostly on the letter written by the Chancellor on 12.08.2024 for not continuing towards the petitioners is a ruse to cowl up the misdeed, dereliction of obligation and inaction of the petitioners, which have resulted within the tragic incident of a younger and promising scholar dropping his life.”
The Court docket added that the stated letter doesn’t in any method restrain the College from continuing with the disciplinary proceedings towards the Petitioner but it surely solely requires the report and the choice of the Board of Administration, which the Board of Administration is obliged and duty-bound to furnish to the Chancellor.
“This Court docket is of the view that the letter dated 12.08.2024 doesn’t in any method restrain the College from continuing towards the petitioners who’ve been prima facie discovered responsible by the Three-member Committee constituted by the Chairman on the incident in addition to the Fee of Inquiry. The choice of the College to maintain the disciplinary proceedings in abeyance on the spacious floor that the very best authority has intervened is totally incorrect, untenable and towards the scheme of the College Act and the Statutes of the College”, it remarked.
The Court docket additional famous that the Board of Administration has wrongly construed the letter written by the Workplace of the Vice Chancellor, and such an interpretation positioned on the provisions of the College Act and the powers of the Chancellor is opposite to the categorical provision itself.
“The Board of Administration is obliged to implement the instructions issued by the Chancellor. The College’s choice, in its Board of Administration assembly held on 24.09.2024 [Ext.P17], to reinstate the petitioners and switch them to Thiruvazhamkunnu School of Avian Science and Administration, regardless of them having been discovered responsible by a Three-member Committee, is unjustified, insensitive and towards the instructions issued by the Chancellor”, it additionally stated.
The Court docket, due to this fact, directed the College to proceed towards the Petitioners in departmental proceedings and finalise the identical expeditiously in accordance with the legislation, ideally inside three months.
“The petitioners are directed to totally co-operate within the disciplinary proceedings. … The College should guarantee acceptable motion towards the erring college students who would have been discovered accountable for the incident by which Sidharthan J S, a second-year BVSc and AH course of the School, misplaced his life within the prime of his youth”, it concluded.
Accordingly, the Excessive Court docket disposed of the Writ Petitions and issued essential instructions.
Trigger Title- Dr. Kanthanathan R. v. State of Kerala & Ors. (Impartial Quotation: 2025:KER:46803)
Look:
Petitioners: Advocates P.C. Sasidharan, Sneha M.S., Praveen H., G. Hariharan, Okay.S. Smitha, Amal Dev D., and Abhijith E.R.
Respondents: Senior Advocates P. Sreekumar, George Poonthottam, SGP Premchand R. Nair, Standing Counsel S. Prasanth, Manu Govind, Advocates Nisha George, and Kavya Varma M.M.
