Gauhati High Court
The Principal vs Paramananda Saikia And Ors on 20 December, 2024
Page No.# 1/9
GAHC010252972024
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/3669/2024
THE PRINCIPAL
TEZPUR LAW COLLEGE, ASSAM, DHANUA NAGAR ROAD,
MAHABHAIRAB TEZPUR, PIN-784001, ASSAM
VERSUS
PARAMANANDA SAIKIA AND ORS
S/O- KUMUD SAIKIA, R/O- BOKAKHAT, DIFFLOO PATHAR, DIST-
GOLAGHAT, PIN-785612, ASSAM
2:THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT.
OF ASSAM
HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
DISPUR
GUWAHATI-781006.
3:THE DIRECTOR OF HIGHER EDUCATION
ASSAM
KAHILIPARA
GUWAHATI-19.
4:THE VICE CHANCELLOR
GAUHATI UNIVERSITY
GOPINATH BORDOLOI NAGAR
GUWAHATI
ASSAM
PIN-781014
5:THE REGISTRAR
GAUHATI UNIVERSITY
Page No.# 2/9
GOPINATH BORDOLOI NAGAR
GUWAHATI
ASSAM
PIN-781014
6:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER
SONITPUR
ASSAM
MAHATMA GANDHI ROAD
MAHABHAIRAB TEZPUR
PIN-784001
ASSAM
7:THE ADDL. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
SONITPUR
ASSAM
MAHATMA GANDHI ROAD
MAHABHAIRAB TEZPUR
PIN-784001
ASSAM
8:THE EXECUTIVE MAGISTRATE
SONITPUR
ASSAM
MAHATMA GANDHI ROAD
MAHABHAIRAB TEZPUR
PIN-784001
ASSAM
9:THE PRINCIPAL
TEZPUR LAW COLLEGE
ASSAM
DHANUA NAGAR ROAD
MAHABHAIRAB TEZPUR
PIN-784001
ASSAM
10:THE REGISTRAR
TEZPUR LAW COLLEGE
ASSAM
DHANUA NAGAR ROAD
MAHABHAIRAB TEZPUR
PIN-784001
ASSA
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. K N CHOUDHURY, MR. D J DAS,MR. R M DEKA,N
Page No.# 3/9
GAUTAM
Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, GA, ASSAM,SC, G U
Linked Case : WP(C)/5662/2024
PARAMANANDA SAIKIA
S/O- KUMUD SAIKIA
R/O- BOKAKHAT
DIFFLOO PATHAR
DIST- GOLAGHAT
PIN-785612
ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 9 ORS
REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT.
OF ASSAM
HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
DISPUR
GUWAHATI-781006.
2:THE DIRECTOR OF HIGHER EDUCATION
ASSAM
KAHILIPARA
GUWAHATI-19.
3:THE VICE CHANCELLOR
GAUHATI UNIVERSITY
GOPINATH BORDOLOI NAGAR
GUWAHATI
ASSAM
PIN-781014
4:THE REGISTRAR
GAUHATI UNIVERSITY
GOPINATH BORDOLOI NAGAR
GUWAHATI
ASSAM
PIN-781014
Page No.# 4/9
5:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER
SONITPUR
ASSAM
MAHATMA GANDHI ROAD
MAHABHAIRAB TEZPUR
PIN-784001
ASSAM
6:THE ADDL. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
SONITPUR
ASSAM
MAHATMA GANDHI ROAD
MAHABHAIRAB TEZPUR
PIN-784001
ASSAM
7:THE EXECUTIVE MAGISTRATE
SONITPUR
ASSAM
MAHATMA GANDHI ROAD
MAHABHAIRAB TEZPUR
PIN-784001
ASSAM
8:THE PRINCIPAL
TEZPUR LAW COLLEGE
ASSAM
DHANUA NAGAR ROAD
MAHABHAIRAB TEZPUR
PIN-784001
ASSAM
9:THE PRINCIPAL INCHARGE
TEZPUR LAW COLLEGE
ASSAM
DHANUA NAGAR ROAD
MAHABHAIRAB TEZPUR
PIN-784001
ASSAM
10:THE REGISTRAR
TEZPUR LAW COLLEGE
ASSAM
DHANUA NAGAR ROAD
MAHABHAIRAB TEZPUR
Page No.# 5/9
PIN-784001
ASSAM
------------
Advocate for : MR D MEDHI
Advocate for : SC
HIGHER EDU appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 9 ORS
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN
ORDER
20.12.2024
Heard Mr. K.N. Choudhury, learned Senior counsel, assisted by Ms. N. Mahanta, learned
counsel for the applicant in I.A.(Civil) No. 3669/2024 and respondent No.9 in
WP(C)/5662/2024. Also heard Mr. P.R. Sarma, learned counsel for the respondent No.1 I.A.
(Civil) No. 3669/2024 and petitioner in WP(C)/5662/2024, as well as Mr. P.J. Phukan,
learned standing counsel, for respondent No. 3 and 4, in Gauhati University.
2. As agreed by the learned Advocates of both sides, it is proposed to disposed of
WP(C) No.5662/2024, filed by the petitioner and the I.A.(Civil) No.3669/2024, filed by the
respondent No.8 by this common order.
3. The background facts leading to filing of the present writ petition is adumbrated
herein below:-
“The Tezpur Law College, Tezpur on 31.08.2024, had organized a
programme in connection with freshmen social of the college. In the said
function, the petitioner, with group of students, entered into the stage and
started protest against the college authorities. Accordingly, the college
authorities had issued show-cause notice to the petitioner on 02.09.2024.
On receipt of said notice, the petitioner had filed his reply on 05.09.2024.
Having found the show-cause reply not satisfactory, the respondent No.9,
the Principal-In-Charge, Tezpur Law College, initiated disciplinary action
Page No.# 6/9against the petitioner vide impugned Notice, Ref. No.TLC/NB/2024/8730,
dated 07.09.2024, with effect from 09.09.2024 as under:-
(i) Restricted his entry to attend classes of the current session
i.e. LL.B. 5th semester.
(ii) Restricted his entry to appear for any Internal Assessment
Examination including Sessional Examination, Seminar & Viva-
voce of the current session i.e. LL.B. 5th semester.
(iii) Restricted his entry to attend any programme, functions,
event and festival held in the college premises for the current
session i.e. LL.B. 5th semester.
(iv) Restricted his entry to appear for the End Semester
Examination of the current session i.e. LL.B. 5th semester.
(v) His selection to the Tezpur Law Colleges Students Union
2024-25 will automatically be vacated.
The said restrictions, having not been followed by the petitioner, another
Notice, vide Ref. No.TLC/Notice/2024/8797, dated 23.09.2024, was served
upon the petitioner to strictly follow the restrictions imposed upon the
petitioner, vide Notice dated 07.09.2024.
4. Being aggrieved, by the impugned Notice, vide Ref. No.TLC/NB/2024/8730, dated
07.09.2024, as well as the impugned Notice vide Ref. No.TLC/Notice/2024/8797, dated
23.09.2024, the petitioner, approached this Court by filing the present writ petition, with a
prayer to quash the said two Notices.
5. In the said writ petition, this court vide order dated 05.11.2024, was pleased to
grant stay upon the disciplinary action at Sl.No.1, 2 and 4 contained in the Notice dated
07.09.2024, as an interim measure.
Page No.# 7/9
6. Thereafter, the respondent No.9, the Principal-In-Charge, Tezpur Law College filed
an interlocutory application, being I.A.(Civil) No.3669/2024, under Article 226(3) of the
Constitution of India for vacation/alteration/ modification of the interim order dated
05.11.2024 passed by this Court in WP(C) No.5662/2024. Accordingly, both the parties
are heard today on the I.A.(Civil) No.3669/2024 as well as upon the writ petition No.
5662 of 2024.
7. Mr. Choudhury, learned Senior counsel for the applicant/respondent No.9 submits
that Tezpur Law College is a private institution and as such it is not a state as defined in
Article 12 of the Constitution of India and the writ jurisdiction, under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India cannot be invoked against a private institution. Further Mr.
Choudhury submits that the dispute between the respondent No.1/petitioner and the
applicant/respondent No.9 in the writ petition is private in nature, which cannot be
adjudicated by this Court in exercising the writ jurisdiction, under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India. Mr. Choudhury, also vehemently submits that the only option
available to the respondent No.1/petitioner is the civil court and this petition is not
maintainable and therefore contended to vacate the interim order dated 05.11.2024 and
to dismiss the writ petition.
8. Whereas, Mr. Sarma, learned counsel for the respondent No.1/petitioner submits
that though the College is a private law college, the same is affiliated to Gauhati
University and it is also a state, as defined in Article 12 of the Constitution of India and as
such, the petition is maintainable and that the respondent No.1/petitioner is innocent and
with the intervention of this Court, vide order dated 05.11.2024, he had appeared in the
LL.B. Examination and if the restriction imposed upon the respondent No.1/petitioner is
materialized, then it will ruin his career and therefore, it is contended to allow the petition
by setting aside the impugned notices, dated 07.09.2024 and 23.09.2024.
9. During the course of deliberation, this Court has asked Mr. Choudhury, learned
Senior counsel for the applicant/respondent No.9 that without prejudice to any of the
party and without going into the merits and demerits of the respective contention of the
Page No.# 8/9
parties, can some concession be given to the respondent No.1/petitioner herein, as the
restrictions being imposed upon him will have serious consequence upon the career of the
petitioner.
10. The learned Senior Counsel then submits that he will obtain necessary instruction
in this regard and contended to list the matter today to apprise the same.
11. Accordingly, Mr. Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel apprised this court that the
applicant/respondent No.9 is ready to give concession to the respondent No.1/petitioner,
but, he has to tender unconditional apology to the college authority and also to publish
the same in two widely circulated local newspapers, one in English and another in
vernacular, and also he has to pay some costs.
12. At this stage, Mr. Sarma, learned counsel for the respondent No.1/petitioner
submits that he is ready to tender unconditional apology and to publishing the same in
two newspapers and also ready to pay some costs. However, Mr. Sharma submits that the
cost should be nominal as the petitioner is student and he is dependent upon the income
of his father.
13. Having considered the submission of learned Advocates of both the parties and as
agreed upon, this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition by setting aside the
impugned Notice dated 07.09.2024, vide Ref. No.TLC/NB/2024/8730, as well as the
impugned Notice, dated 23.09.2024, vide Ref. No.TLC/Notice/2024/8797.
14. However, the respondent No.1/petitioner has to tender written apology to the
applicant/respondent No.9 and shall publish the same in two widely circulated
newspapers in that locality, one in English and the other in vernacular, and also he has to
pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) being the cost, which shall be
deposited in the Student Welfare Fund of the Tezpur Law College and if such fund is not
available, then the same shall be deposited in the office of the District Legal Services
Authority, Tezpur, within a period of 1(one) month from today.
15. While fixing the quantum of cost, this Court has taken note of the submission of
Page No.# 9/9
learned Advocates of both the parties and also taken note of the background facts leading
to initiation of the disciplinary action against the respondent No.1/petitioner. And taking
note of the all the facts and circumstances, this court is of the view that the quantum of
cost must have some deterrent effect and the same is required to maintain discipline
amongst the unruly students. Accordingly, this Court is of the view that a sum of
Rs.10,000/- will be justified and reasonable amount of cost herein this case.
16. It is being clarified the respondent No.1/petitioner has to comply with the direction
of this court stated in para No.14 of this order within a period of two moths from today. It
is further clarified that in the event of failing to comply with the aforesaid directions, the
restrictions so imposed upon him, vide impugned Notice dated 07.09.2024, vide Ref.
No.TLC/NB/2024/8730, as well as the impugned Notice, dated 23.09.2024, vide Ref.
No.TLC/Notice/2024/8797, shall automatically stands restored, after two months.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant