Allahabad High Court Directs UGC, GOI To Ensure Implementation Of Guidelines For Reform Of Students Facing Disciplinary Action

The Allahabad High Court has issued directions to University Grants Commission (UGC) and the Government of India to ensure circulation and implementation of Guidelines dated 12.04.2023 issued by UGC which contains provisions regarding reformation of delinquent students.

The Court also directed Banaras Hindu University to formulate the reformation program for students facing disciplinary inquiry in accordance with the Guidelines dated 12.04.2023 and the judgments of the Allahabad High Court within 6 months.

Justice Ajay Bhanot further directed the UGC to “hold regular workshops and seminars to create a library of collective experiences of various universities in these matters. It will enable universities to gain from shared experiences and upgrade their programmes.”

UGC Guidelines dated 12.04.2023 provide for holistic development of students including providing them opportunity to reform by directing the Universities to establish structured reform and self-development programs.

In Anant Narayan Mishra Vs. Union of India, Mohammad Ghayas Vs. State of U.P. and others, and Piyush Yadav Vs. Union of India and others, the Allahabad High Court had issued directions to BHU and UGC regarding reformation and rehabilitation of students against whom disciplinary action was proposed to be taken. UGC was directed to aid the universities in developing and implementing such reformation programs. The Court had granted power to BHU to place restrains on student including ban on entry in campus if necessary, which the student pursued the academic courses along with reformation program.

Regarding compliance of the earlier directions of the Allahabad High Court, Justice Bhanot observed that BHU has taken steps to include the reforms program within its statutes, and Aligarh Muslim University had already incorporated the same.

The Court observed that the Universities which fall under UGC have an obligation to implement the UGC guidelines dated 12.04.2023 and UGC must ensure that the guidelines are being implemented and complied with. Further, the Court observed that with respect to Central Universities, additional responsibility was on the Government of India to ensure compliance of such guidelines.

Factual Background

Petitioner is a student of B.A. (Hons.), Faculty of Arts in Banaras Hindu University. Petitioner was suspended for 6 months and deprived of all privileges of the University. Further, directions were issued debarring the petitioner from appearing in his semester exams as the petitioner along with a large number of students had indulged in physical violence with one student namely Shri Mahendra Patel at Cyber Library.

Petitioner challenged his suspension order as well as the order of the Deputy Registrar (Academic), Banaras Hindu University rejecting his representation for revocation of the suspension order.

Counsel for petitioner argued that the petitioner being a bright scholar with a promising future ought to be given an opportunity to redeem himself. It was argued that penal punishment was being imposed upon the petitioner without giving him any opportunity of redemption.

It was argued that by not following the decisions of the Allahabad High Court in Anant Narayan Mishra Vs. Union of India, Mohammad Ghayas Vs. State of U.P. and others, and Piyush Yadav Vs. Union of India and others, BHU as well as UGC and other stakeholders had jeopardized the future of coming generations.

High Court Verdict

The Court held that the guidelines laid down by the UGC pursuant to the directions of the Court are moving towards the goal of nation building.

“Disciplinary powers of the University have not been curtailed or diluted by the UGC guidelines in any manner, and penal action has not been constrained or dispensed with. [Also see Anant Narayan Mishra (supra)]. However under the UGC scheme it is imperative for the university to balance and integrate the penal regime with a reformative programme. Both the penal regime and reformative programme have to exist side by side or cohabit in the disciplinary structures of the universities.”

The Court held that punishment imposed must be proportional to maintain balance between institutional discipline and student reform.

“Too light a punishment may not be conducive to institutional discipline. Too harsh a punishment will not be consistent with the norms of justice. The universities also have to be always cognizant of the fact that deviant behaviour trends in students are transient and always susceptible to positive influences which can be induced by a reform programme.”

Regarding the impugned suspension of the petitioner, the Court quashed the suspension order on grounds of violation of principles of natural justice. The Court also observed that nature of action and role of students had not been mentioned in the records.

The Court observed that no aggravating circumstances have been brought on record to justify a penal measure of suspension.

“The incident has to be seen in light of the fact that young students often get carried away by youthful exuberance.”

Case Title: Raunak Mishra v. Banaras Hindu University And 2 Others [WRIT - C No. - 13741 of 2023]

Counsel for Petitioner: Prakhar Saran Srivastava, Atul Kumar Tiwari

Counsel for Respondent: Hem Pratap Singh, Rijwan Ali Akhtar, Vimlendu Tripathi

Click Here To Read/Download Order