If ‘expelled’ students submit ‘unconditional apology’, will consider their case: South Asian University to HC

At this stage, the counsel appearing for the three students said he will “seek instructions” from his clients and sought that the matter be listed on August 7, which was permitted by the HC.

The HC orally said, “This shows that the University wants the students to complete their course… this shows their bonafides”.

The HC was hearing two pleas moved by three students against orders of the university expelling them over alleged indisciplined acts.

The plea moved by one of the petitioner students (an SAU merit scholarship holder) states that on November 22, 2022, one student in the university had fallen sick, and subsequently suffered a cardiac arrest and had to be hospitalised. The plea states that prior to the hospitalisation, the student “had to undergo severe psychological distress at the university due to the initiation of disciplinary action against him”.

Concerned about the student’s health, other students, including the petitioner, on November 23, 2022, sought an audience with the university administration to discuss the “arbitrary disciplinary action” initiated against the hospitalised student by the university, concerns pertaining to his treatment cost and whether the same would be borne by the university.

The plea states that on November 26, 2022, the proctor issued a show cause notice which, among various allegations, stated that the petitioner student had on November 23, 2022, “entered the office of Associate Dean of Students… without his permission and persistently demanded in a threatening language complete revocation of the disciplinary action against certain students. (he) entered a Mathematics class of Director (A&E)… at 10.30 am without his permission and wanted to address the Mathematics students. When he requested you to meet him after the class, you shouted at him in these words, ‘Can I know your name?’ When he informed you that it was the last week of the semester studies, you used such abusive words as ‘forget about your… studies’. Forcefully and without permission of the Acting Registrar, (he) entered his office when he was meeting officials of the University… made Acting Registrar captive for several hours to again force him to do what he was not bound to do, as aforesaid, or omit from doing, as aforesaid, thereby did not allow him to leave his office for home until the availability of assistance from the Host country.”

The plea states that these allegations against the petitioner student in the show cause notice are “unsubstantial, baseless and does not stand in the eyes of law”.

On December 9, 2022, the petitioner filed a reply to the show cause notice. On January 6, the Deputy Registrar, SAU, intimated the petitioner about the constitution of a high power committee to consider the petitioner’s representation and directed the student to appear before the committee on January 13 at 11 am.

On January 10, the petitioner wrote an email representation to the proctor seeking information regarding the committee, which has not been provided till date. Thereafter, the petitioner student appeared before the committee on January 13, the plea states.

On February 17, the Proctor issued an office order stating that the committee had recommended “expulsion of the petitioner and declared out of bounds of the Respondent University”; as per the Office Order the Committee, recommended that the petitioner may be debarred from joining any programme of the University in future.

The petitioner student on February 26 sent an email representation against the February 17 order to the President and the Proctor, stating that the student had not committed any act in contravention to rules, regulations and bye-laws of SAU.

The student undertook to continue following the rules, regulation and bye-laws of SAU, in consonance with all the democratic rights vested in the student as an individual. Thereafter, SAU on March 2 issued another office order that the high-powered committee had considered the student’s representation and recommended the dismissal of the “reconsideration” sought by the student.

In its response to the plea, the university said the petitioner student had been an “active participant” in “unlawful protests” started by a small group of students on October 13, 2022, however, the university had taken a “lenient view” and did not proceed against the student.

“It is pertinent to mention that despite repeated efforts made by the respondent to dissuade them from smooth functioning of university, no heed was paid by them… in view that the entire academic and administrative atmosphere of the university was getting vitiated by a small group of students, lawful action initiated was against them in the form of expulsion and suspension. However, in view of apology letters tendered by such students the respondent, taking a lenient view, revoked the expulsion and suspension orders,” the reply states.

The university has further said despite this, the said group of students, including the petitioner, “indulged in blatant acts of indiscipline on campus” on November 23, 2022, leading to expulsion of certain students. The reply also states that the committee considered the petitioner student’s case after giving a reasonable opportunity, observing the principles of natural justice.

The reply states that disciplinary action was taken after it was established that the petitioner student had indulged in “multiple acts of gross, wilful and grave indiscipline” including “endangering life of university functionaries”.

The plea seeks a direction for quashing the February 17 and March 2 office orders issued to the student. The plea submits that with the operation of the orders, the student may lose the fellowship on account of the alleged misconduct.