Read Time: 07 minutes

Synopsis

The Bombay High Court has ordered two students of  Birla Institute of Technology & Science at Goa to undergo two months of community service in an old age home after they were found to be involved in the theft of potato chips, sanitiser, chocolate, a phone stand, lamps, and a Bluetooth speaker from stalls on the college campus.

The division bench of the high court at Goa, comprising Chief Justice Devendra Upadhyaya and Justice MS Sonak, heard the petition filed by two students of the Birla Institute of Technology and Science who were debarred for their first semesters.

The institute had filed a complaint against 5 students, out of which 3 were pardoned, but the remaining 2 were not, leading them to approach the high court.

The students were never shown the complaint by the institute, but they admitted to the theft and returned the stolen items along with a written apology.

Despite this, the institute debarred them from writing their first semester and imposed a fine of Rs. 50,000 on each of the two students.

The students had approached the high court as their first-semester exams were scheduled to begin on January 6, 2024.

The high court, through an interim order, directed that the students be allowed to sit for the exams, and their answer sheets be kept in a sealed cover.

The division bench suggested that the director should consider a reformative approach and punish the students as per the guidelines of the University Grants Commission (UGC), which prescribes community service as a suitable disciplinary measure.

The Director of the Institute refused to pardon the students, asserting that granting a pardon would set an example, allowing students to seek court intervention if a pardon is not granted by the institute in future cases.

The high court, in its order, stated that when the penalties imposed by the institute breach the institute's guidelines, the institute cannot claim immunity from judicial review.

“When it is found that there is discrimination in a matter of imposition of penalties or, where the penalties imposed are in breach of the guidelines enacted by the Institute itself or where the penalty imposed excludes considerations of reformation, the Institute cannot claim any immunity from judicial review,” the order reads.

The bench further observed that it was hurt by the approach of the director and refrained from commenting on the issue.

“Though we are hurt by this approach of the Director, we refrain from saying anything more because we are mindful that the two petitioners before us have to complete their education with the respondents for the next few years and not be scarred for life due to the indiscretion or even indiscipline indulged by them on this one occasion,” the order states.

The bench, therefore, suspended the order that prevented the students from appearing in the exams.

The bench also directed the institute to refund 50% of the penalty deposit paid by the students and to refund the remaining 50% after they undergo community service.

Furthermore, the high court directed the institute to evaluate the answer sheets of the two students, which were kept in a sealed cover, and declare their results.

Case title: Vuribindi Mokshith Reddy & Anr vs BITS