# Prin./Chief Medical Superintendent Saraswati Medical College, Unnao & Ors v. Mohammad Shakir Hussain & Ors

- **Citation:** (2022) 10 ILRA 1054
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2022-10-10
- **Case number:** Special Appeal No. 420 of 2022
- **Bench:** Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya, Saurabh Srivastava
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/prin-chief-medical-superintendent-saraswati-medical-college-unnao-ors-v-47666
- **Pages:** 12

## Headnote

A. Education Law - Rustication/Ragging -
National Medical Commission (Prevention and
Prohibition of Ragging in Medical Colleges and
Institutions) Regulations 2021 - Regulations
23(1), 24 - National Medical Commission Act,
2019 - Section 57 - Regulations 2021 have been
framed and published only recently as on 18.11.2021
and are, thus, in their nascent stage. Implementation
of Regulations 2021...thus require some amount of
understanding as to how the Regulations are to apply
not only as a measure to check the menace of
ragging, but also as a measure to conduct the
inquiry/investigation as contemplated in Regulation
23 in a fair and appropriate manner. (Para 24)

B. Legal protection available to a student,
accused of ragging, when he is subjected
to an inquiry/investigation u/Regulation
23(2). The consequence of action against such
a
student
which
may
ensue
ultimately
u/Regulation 24, may be far-reaching even to
the extent that in a given case it may ruin his
career. Having regard to the seriousness of the
consequences in respect of future career of a
student
pursuing
a
vocational
course,
Regulation 23 of 2021 Regulations ought to be
followed meticulously and in its letter and spirit.

C. Principles as a precautionary measure
are laid down to aid the provisions of 2021
Regulations. The authorities of a Medical
College or any other Institution are to be
primarily, governed by the statutory regulations
namely Regulations 2021. They may, however,
seek some guidance from the observations.
(Para 26)

These guidelines are not in any manner, in
derogation of the 2021 regulations, rather only
to facilitate appropriate implementation of the
Regulations including Regulations 23 and 24 and
accordingly observations are to be understood
in this perspective and context alone. (Para 27)

In the present case, it is noticeable that
the
respondent
no.
1-petitioner
was
neither
provided
the
copies
of
the
statements of the complainant/witnesses
nor was he ever confronted with the copy
of the report said to have been submitted
by the Anti-Ragging Committee to the
Head of the Institution and accordingly
the inquiry as contemplated in Regulation
23 of 2021 Regulations 2021 against the
respondent no. 1-petitioner be conducted
afresh by furnishing him copy of the complaint,
statement of the complainants and witnesses
made before the Specific Committee on
21.7.2022 and inviting his reply to the same and
permitting him to make statement in his
defence. Thereafter the appellant-Institution
shall complete the inquiry in terms of Regulation
2021 as also keeping in view the observations
made hereinabove. (Para 28)

The order under appeal dated 13.9.2022 passed
by the learned Single Judge in Writ-C No. 5622
of 2022 is hereby set aside. The decision of the
Principal of the Institution, dated 25.7.2022
10 All. Prin./Chief Medical Superintendent Saraswati Medical College, Unnao & Ors. Vs.
 Mohammad Shakir Hussain & Ors.
1055
shall abide by the decision which may be taken
finally in terms of this order. (Para 30)

Special appeal disposed off. (E-4)

Present special appeal lays a challenge to
the judgment and order dated 13.09.2022,
by which the learned Single Judge allowed
Writ-C No. 5622 of 2022 and order of
rustication dated 25.07.2022 has been set
aside.

## Text

_Characters 0–39,889 of 41,474. This is a partial read: ask again with offset=39889 for what follows._

1054 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
any circumstance in their application under
Section 13 B(2) of the Act, 1955.

13. The appeal is allowed.
----------
(2022) 10 ILRA 1054
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: LUCKNOW 10.10.2022

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE DEVENDRA KUMAR
UPADHYAYA, J.
THE HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J.

Special Appeal No. 420 of 2022

Prin./Chief
Medical
Superintendent
Saraswati Medical College, Unnao & Ors.
 ...Appellants
Versus
Mohammad Shakir Hussain & Ors.
 ...Respondents

Counsel for the Appellants:
Apoorva Tewari, Aditya Tewari

Counsel for the Respondents:
Kapil Gupta, C.S.C., Gyanendra Kumar
Srivastava, Kshitij Mishra, Savitra Vardhan
Singh

A. Education Law - Rustication/Ragging -
National Medical Commission (Prevention and
Prohibition of Ragging in Medical Colleges and
Institutions) Regulations 2021 - Regulations
23(1), 24 - National Medical Commission Act,
2019 - Section 57 - Regulations 2021 have been
framed and published only recently as on 18.11.2021
and are, thus, in their nascent stage. Implementation
of Regulations 2021...thus require some amount of
understanding as to how the Regulations are to apply
not only as a measure to check the menace of
ragging, but also as a measure to conduct the
inquiry/investigation as contemplated in Regulation
23 in a fair and appropriate manner. (Para 24)

B. Legal protection available to a student,
accused of ragging, when he is subjected
to an inquiry/investigation u/Regulation
23(2). The consequence of action against such
a
student
which
may
ensue
ultimately
u/Regulation 24, may be far-reaching even to
the extent that in a given case it may ruin his
career. Having regard to the seriousness of the
consequences in respect of future career of a
student
pursuing
a
vocational
course,
Regulation 23 of 2021 Regulations ought to be
followed meticulously and in its letter and spirit.

C. Principles as a precautionary measure
are laid down to aid the provisions of 2021
Regulations. The authorities of a Medical
College or any other Institution are to be
primarily, governed by the statutory regulations
namely Regulations 2021. They may, however,
seek some guidance from the observations.
(Para 26)

These guidelines are not in any manner, in
derogation of the 2021 regulations, rather only
to facilitate appropriate implementation of the
Regulations including Regulations 23 and 24 and
accordingly observations are to be understood
in this perspective and context alone. (Para 27)

In the present case, it is noticeable that
the
respondent
no.
1-petitioner
was
neither
provided
the
copies
of
the
statements of the complainant/witnesses
nor was he ever confronted with the copy
of the report said to have been submitted
by the Anti-Ragging Committee to the
Head of the Institution and accordingly
the inquiry as contemplated in Regulation
23 of 2021 Regulations 2021 against the
respondent no. 1-petitioner be conducted
afresh by furnishing him copy of the complaint,
statement of the complainants and witnesses
made before the Specific Committee on
21.7.2022 and inviting his reply to the same and
permitting him to make statement in his
defence. Thereafter the appellant-Institution
shall complete the inquiry in terms of Regulation
2021 as also keeping in view the observations
made hereinabove. (Para 28)

The order under appeal dated 13.9.2022 passed
by the learned Single Judge in Writ-C No. 5622
of 2022 is hereby set aside. The decision of the
Principal of the Institution, dated 25.7.2022
10 All. Prin./Chief Medical Superintendent Saraswati Medical College, Unnao & Ors. Vs.
 Mohammad Shakir Hussain & Ors.
1055
shall abide by the decision which may be taken
finally in terms of this order. (Para 30)

Special appeal disposed off. (E-4)

Present special appeal lays a challenge to
the judgment and order dated 13.09.2022,
by which the learned Single Judge allowed
Writ-C No. 5622 of 2022 and order of
rustication dated 25.07.2022 has been set
aside.

(Delivered by Hon'ble Devendra Kumar
Upadhyaya, J.
&
Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava, J.)

1. Heard Sri Apoorva Tiwari and Sri
Aditya Tiwari, learned counsel appearing
for the appellant, Sri Akash Dixit, learned
counsel representing the respondent no.1petitioner,
learned
State
counsel
representing the State-respondent No. 2, Sri
Kshitij
Mishra,
learned
counsel
representing the respondent no. 3, Sri
Savitra Vardhan Singh, learned counsel
representing the respondent no. 4 and Sri
Gyanendra Srivastava, learned counsel
representing the respondent no. 5.

2. This special appeal has been
preferred challenging the judgment and
order dated 13.09.2022 passed by the
learned Single Judge, whereby Writ-C No.
5622 of 2022 filed by the respondent no. 1petitioner therein has been allowed and the
order dated 25.7.2022 passed by the
appellant-Institution whereby respondent
no. 1-petitioner was rusticated temporarily
for a period of three months as intern in the
Institution has been set aside. Learned
Single Judge has also directed that the
certificate which may be awarded to the
respondent no. 1-petitioner on completion
of internship shall not record that he was
found guilty of ragging in the Institution.

3. Submission of the learned counsel
for the appellants is that the finding
recorded by the learned Single Judge that
there was no material on record, which
could form the basis of guilt of ragging
against the respondent no. 1-petitioner, is
not correct in as much as on record there
was enough material to form the opinion
that he was guilty of ragging.

4. It has further been argued by
learned counsel for the appellants that
while
conducting
the
inquiry
which
culminated
in passing
of
the order
impugned in the writ petition before the
learned Single Judge, the provisions
contained in the statutory regulations
known as National Medical Commission
(Prevention and Prohibition of Ragging in
Medical
Colleges
and
Institutions)
Regulations 2021 (hereinafter referred as
'Regulations 2021') were meticulously
followed and as such the finding recorded
by the learned Single Judge Bench that the
respondent no. 1-petitioner was not given
any opportunity to confront with the
inquiry report, is misplaced for the reason
that under the procedure prescribed in the
said Regulations no such prescription is
available. It is also argued that the finding
recorded by the learned Single Judge that
no
show-cause
notice
inviting
explanation/reply to the inquiry report was
given, also does not have any bearing in the
matters of inquiries to be conducted in
terms of the Regulations 2021 for the
reason
that
the
Regulations
do not
contemplate any such procedure.

5. Lastly, Sri Apoorva Tiwari, learned
counsel
representing
the
appellantInstitution has submitted that in any
eventuality in case any flaw in the
procedure followed for conducting the
inquiry was found by the learned Single
1056 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
Judge, right of the Institution to complete
the inquiry as per the legal procedure could
not have been curtailed and in the instant
case the conduct of the respondent no. 1petitioner warranted that some exemplary
action against the respondent no. 1petitioner ought to have been taken in order
to fulfil the aims and objectives for which
Regulations 2021 have been framed.

6. On the other hand, Sri Akash Dixit,
learned counsel representing the respondent
no. 1-petitioner submitted that in view of
the admission made by the appellantInstitution that the respondent no. 1petitioner was not confronted with the
inquiry report on the basis of which
impugned action has precipitated, the
judgment and order passed by the learned
Single Judge, which is under appeal herein,
does not warrant any interference by this
court in this special appeal. He has also
stated that as a matter of fact enough
material was brought to the notice of the
learned Single Judge depicting the clear
bias of the parties/Management of the
appellant-Institution against the respondent
no. 1-petitioner and it is only on accout of
this bias and mala fide that the impugned
action against him whereby he was
rusticated temporarily for a period of three
months had actuated. In this view of the
matter, the submission is that the special
appeal is liable to be dismissed at its
threshold.

7. We have considered the rival
submissions made by the learned counsel
representing the respective parties and have
also perused the material available on
record before us on this special appeal.

8. The respondent no. 1-petitioner
after completing his 5-years study in
MBBS Course got himself enrolled as an
Intern, which is compulsory for award of
MBBS degree. On 19.7.2022 the College
administration received a complaint by two
students of 2020 batch, who were pursuing
their MBBS Course in the appellantInstitution, against the respondent no. 1petitioner with the allegation that the
respondent no. 1-petitioner has not only
misbehaved with them, but as a matter of
fact on account of the threat extended by
him to the complainants they were not
feeling secure to complete their studies.
The complainants, thus, requested that
appropriate action be taken against the
respondent no. 1-petitioner. On the said
complaint
the
Chief
Medical
Superintendent-cum-Officiating
Principal
of the appellant-Institution issued a notice,
whereby a specific committee comprising
of one Chairman, One Secretary, four
Members and two Special Invitees was
constituted in terms of the provisions
contained in Regulation 23(1) of the 2021
Regulations. Constitution of the said
specific committee was based on an urgent
investigation report, which was approved
by the Chairman, Anti Ragging Committee
of the Institution. Consequently, by means
of a notice dated 20.7.2021, intimation was
given to the complainants, respondent no.
1-petitioner as also three other students,
who are said to be witnesses and were
pursuing their IIIrd Year MBBS Course, to
participate in the proceedings of the
Committee, which was held on 21.7.2020.

9. On 21.7.2022 in the proceedings
before the specific committee, statements
of the complainants, those of the witnesses
and also that of the respondent no. 1petitioner were recorded. The CCTV
footage of 19.7.2022 at 12.30 p.m. was also
summoned by the specific committee. The
Specific Committee on a consideration of
the material which could be gathered by it
10 All. Prin./Chief Medical Superintendent Saraswati Medical College, Unnao & Ors. Vs.
 Mohammad Shakir Hussain & Ors.
1057
submitted its report on 21.7.2022 and based
on the said report decision by the AntiRagging Committee was taken in its
meeting held on 22.7.2022, whereby it was
resolved that the respondent no. 1petitioner be rusticated temporarily for a
period of three months from his internship
in the appellant-Institution. On the basis of
this decision and recommendation of the
Anti-Ragging Committee dated 22.7.2022
that the order dated 25.5.2022 was passed
by Head of the Institution which became
the subject matter of challenge before the
learned Single Judge.

10. Before adverting to the respective
submissions made by the learned counsel
appearing for the parties we may notice
certain provisions of the Regulations 2021.
Regulations 2021 have been framed by the
National Medical Commission in exercise
of its power vested in it under section 57 of
the National Medical Commission Act
2019. "Ragging" is defined in Regulation
2(l) of the Regulations to mean "Any act of
misconduct
of
students
towards
one
another". Definition of 'Ragging' can also
be found in Regulation (4). Regulation 3
mentions certain acts that may constitute
"Ragging". Regulation 3 in Chapter 2 of the
said Regulations states that Ragging shall
mean any disorderly conduct, whether
verbal or in writing, which has the effect of
"teasing" "treating" or "handling" a student
with rudeness, indulging in any rowdy or in
disciplined activities, which may cause
annoyance,
hardship
or
psychological
harms. Regulations 3 and 4 of Regulations
2021 are quoted hereunder:

"3.
Definition
of
RaggingRagging shall mean any disorderly conduct,
whether by words spoken or written or by an
act which has the effect of teasing, treating or
handling with rudeness any other student,
indulging in rowdy or undisciplined activities
which causes or is likely to cause annoyance,
hardship or psychological harm or to raise
fear or apprehension thereof in a fresher or a
junior student or asking the students to do
any act or perform something which such
student will not in the ordinary course and
which has the effect of causing or generating
a sense of shame or embarrassment so as to
adversely affect the physique or psyche of a
fresher or a junior student.

4. Actions that may constitute
ragging-The following actions shall be
included but not limited to those that may
constitute ragging, namely

(a) any conduct by any student or
students whether by words spoken or written
or by an act which has the effect of teasing,
treating or handling with rudeness a fresher
or any other student;

(b)
indulging
in
rowdy
or
undisciplined activities by any student or
students which causes or is likely to cause
annoyance,
hardship,
physical
or
psychological harm or to raise fear or
apprehension thereof in any fresher or any
other student;

(c) asking any student to do any act
which such the student will not in the
ordinary course do and which has the effect
of causing or generating a sense of shame, or
torment or embarrassment so as to adversely
affect the physique or psyche of such fresher
or any other student;

(d) any act by a senior student that
prevents, disrupts or disturbs the regular
academic activity of any other student or a
fresher,

(e) exploiting the services of a
fresher or any other student for completing
the
academic
tasks
assigned
to
an
individual or a group of students;

(f) any act of financial extortion
or forceful expenditure burden put on a
fresher or any other student by students;
1058 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES

(g) any act of physical abuse
including all variants of it, such as, sexual
abuse, homosexual assaults, stripping,
forcing obscene and lewd acts, gestures,
causing bodily harm or any other danger to
health or person:

(h) any act or abuse by spoken
words, emails, post, snail-mails, blogs,
public insults which would also include
deriving perverted pleasure, vicarious or
sadistic thrill from actively or passively
participating in the discomfiture to fresher
or any other student;

(i) any act of physical or mental
abuse (including bullying and exclusion)
targeted at another student (fresher or
otherwise) on the ground of colour, race,
religion, caste, ethnicity, gender (including
transgender),
sexual
orientation,
appearance, nationality, regional origins,
linguistic identity, place of birth, place of
residence or economic background;

(j) any act that undermines
human
dignity
and
respect
through
humiliation or otherwise;

(k) any act that affects the mental
health and self-confidence of a fresher or
any other student with or without an intent
to derive a sadistic pleasure or off power,
authority or superiority by a student over
any fresher or any other student;

(l) any other act not explicitly
mentioned above but otherwise construed
as an act of ragging in the letter and spirit
of the definition for ragging as provided
under regulations 3 and 4."

11. From the aforequoted provisions
of Regulations 3 and 4 as also the
definition in Clause 2(l) of Regulations
2021 what can be noticed is that various
kinds of acts having some adverse
psychological or physical impact on a
student constitute 'Ragging'. Ragging, thus,
is not confined to physical assault alone.
Regulation 7(3)(v) casts a duty on the
Medical Colleges or other Institutions to
device certain methods and measures which
are necessary for checking menace of
Ragging. One of the measures provided in
the said Regulation under Clause (g) is that
Medical Colleges and other Institutions
should evolve a robust measure, so that
message and intent of the Institution may
be loud and clear enough to ensure report
of every incident of Ragging and also to
ensure that every case of Ragging is dealt
with according to the provisions of the
Regulations 2021 and any other applicable
laws for the time being in force.

12. Regulation 8 of Regulation 2021
clearly mandates that migration certificate
or transfer certificate or conduct certificate,
which may be issued to the student after
completion of his studies by the Institution,
shall have an entry in addition to other
entries as to whether the student concerned
has been punished for the offence of
committing or abetting Ragging or not and
further as to whether the student has
displayed persistent violent or aggresive
conduct ?

13. The Regulations provide for other
measures to be taken by the Institutions,
such as constitution of Anti Ragging Squad
and establishing Anti Ragging Control
Room or Helpline/Monitoring Committee
or Monitoring Cell etc.

14.

Regulation
21(4)
of
the
Regulations 2021 clearly mandates that
without any exception, name of the
complainant in all instances shall be kept
confidential, unless of course it is otherwise
permissible. The procedure for conducting
the institutional inquiry or investigation and
report etc. is provided in Regulation 23.
Regulation 24 permits the administration of
10 All. Prin./Chief Medical Superintendent Saraswati Medical College, Unnao & Ors. Vs.
 Mohammad Shakir Hussain & Ors.
1059
Medical College or any other Institution to
take any administrative action on the
recommendation of the Anti Ragging
Committee. Regulations 23 and 24 of the
Regulations
2021
are
extracted
hereinbelow:

"23.
Institutional
inquiry
or
investigation and report.- (1) The Head of
the Institution shall constitute specific
committee to inquire into or investigate the
incident of ragging without waiting for the
report of any other authority, even if this is
being investigated by the police or local
authorities.

(2) The inquiry or investigation
shall be conducted thoroughly including
on-the-spot or site of the incident in a fair
and transparent manner, without any bias or
prejudice, upholding the principles of
natural
justice
and
giving
adequate
opportunity to the student or students
accused of ragging and other witnesses to
place before it the facts, documents and
views concerning the incident of ragging,
and
considering
such
other
relevant
information as may be required.

(3) The entire process shall be
completed and a report duly submitted
within seven days of the information or
reporting of the incident of ragging.

(4) The report shall be placed
before the Head of the Institution or the
Anti-Ragging Committee.

(5) The Anti-Ragging Committee
shall examine the report, decide on and
recommend further administrative action to
the Head of the Institution.

24. Institutional administrative
and penal actions.- (1) Every medical
college or institution shall, after receiving
the recommendations of the Anti-Ragging
Committee under regulation 23, take
necessary administrative action as it may
deem fit,

(2) The Anti-Ragging Committee,
on accepting the report of the institutional
inquiry or investigation by the appropriate
committee, shall recommend one or more
of the actions provided under subregulations (5) and (6) depending on the
nature, gravity and seriousness of the guilt
established of the act of ragging as given
under the provisions of Chapter II with the
understanding that the action shall be
exemplary and justifiably harsh to act as a
deterrent
against
recurrence
of
such
incidents:

(3) Where the individual person
committing or abetting an act of ragging is
not identified on the basis of the findings of
the institutional inquiry or investigations,
and
the
subsequent
recommendations
thereof, the medical college or institution
thereof shall resort to collective punishment
of more than one or a group of persons, as
deemed fit, as a deterrent to ensure
community pressure on the potential
raggers.

(4) The broad ingredients that
may call for punitive actions on receipt and
approval of the recommendations include
but is not limited to

(i) abetment to ragging;

(ii)
criminal
conspiracy
to
ragging;

(iii)
unlawful
assembly
and
rioting while ragging: public nuisance
created during ragging;

(iv)
public
nuisance
created
during ragging;

(v) violation of decency and
morals through ragging;

(vi) physical or psychological
humiliation;

(vii) causing injury to body,
causing hurt or grievous hurt;

(viii) wrongful restraint;

(ix) wrongful confinement;

(x) use of criminal force;
1060 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES

(xi) assault as well as sexual
offences or even unnatural offences;

(xii) extortion in any forms;

(xiii) criminal intimidation;

(xiv) criminal trespass;

(xv) offences against property;

(xvi) any other act construed as
provided under regulations 3 and 4.

(5) The nature of punitive actions
that may be decided shall include the
following, but shall not be limited to one or
more of these actions that may be imposed,
as deemed fit, namely :-

(i) suspension from attending
classes and academic privileges:

(ii) withholding or withdrawing
scholarship
or
fellowship
and
other
benefits;

(iii) debarring from appearing in
any test or examination or other evaluation
process:

(iv) withholding results;

(v) debarring from attending
conferences,
and
other
academic
programmes;

(vi) debarring from representing
the institution in any regional, national or
international
meet,
tournament,
youth
festival, etc.;

(vii) suspension or expulsion
from the hostel;

(viii) imposition of a fine ranging
from twenty-five thousand rupees to one
lakh rupees

(ix) cancellation of admission;

(x) rustication from the medical
college or institution for a period ranging
from one to four semesters;

(xi) expulsion from the medical
colleges or institutions and consequent
debarring from admission to any other
institution for a specified period.

(6) Without prejudice to the
provisions of regulation 8, it shall be
mandatory upon the medical college or
institution to enter in the Migration
Certificate or Transfer Certificate issued to
the student as to whether the student has
been
punished
for
the
offence
of
committing or abetting ragging, or not, as
also whether the student has displayed
persistent violent or aggressive behaviour
or any inclination to harm others.

(7) Any other measure as directed
by Courts of law shall be followed by the
medical college or institution.

(8) The Head of the Institution
shall follow-up the information regarding
the incident of ragging provided under subregulation (4) of regulation 22, to the
University to which the medical college or
institution is affiliated with a report
regarding the findings of the institutional
level inquiry or investigation and the
actions taken thereof.

(9) The Head of the Institution
shall provide a report regarding the incident
of ragging and the actions taken thereof to
the Commission having informed earlier
according to the provisions of subregulation (4) of regulation 22."

15. As per the aforesaid statutory
prescriptions available in Regulation 23,
Head of the Institution is to constitute a
specific committee to inquire into or
investigate the incident of ragging. SubRegulation
(2)
of
Regulation
23
categorically provides that the inquiry or
investigation
has
to
be
conducted
thoroughly in a fair and transparent
manner, without any bias or prejudice,
upholding the principles of Natural Justice
and giving adequate opportunity to the
student or students accused of ragging. It
also provides that the inquiry/investigation
shall
be
conducted
by
providing
opportunity to the witnesses to place the
facts,
documents
and
their
views
concerning the incident of ragging and by
10 All. Prin./Chief Medical Superintendent Saraswati Medical College, Unnao & Ors. Vs.
 Mohammad Shakir Hussain & Ors.
1061
considering any such material which may
be relevant. The inquiry/investigation to be
conducted by the specific committee is to
be placed before the Head of the Institution
or the Anti Ragging Committee. The AntiRagging
Committee
thereafter
is
to
examine the report, decide and recommend
further administrative action to the Head of
the Institution. Under Regulation 24, as
observed above, Head of the Institution is
to take final decision.

16. The Regulations 2021 are
statutory in nature having been framed
under section 57 of the National Medical
Commission Act 2019 and hence are
binding and no deviation from the same is
permissible under law.

17. While we applaud the purpose and
object of framing such regulations, we may
also notice that Regulations, on one hand,
provide for adequate measures to check the
menace of ragging, which is rampant in the
Medical Colleges/other institutions and, on
the other hand, it also provides for taking
due care in conducting the inquiry against
the students in respect of whom complaint
or charges of ragging is received.

18. Regulation 23(2) clearly provides
that
the
inquiry/investigation
by
the
specific committee shall be conducted not
only in fair and transparent manner, but
also without any bias or prejudice. It
further provides that the specific committee
while conducting the inquiry/investigation
shall uphold the principals of Natural
Justice giving adequate opportunity to the
student
or
students
against
whom
charges/complaint
of
ragging
are
leveled/made. It, thus, clearly encompasses
in its fold adequate protection to a studengt
facing the charge of ragging. Occurrence of
the words "Upholding the principles of
Natural
Justice
and
giving
adequate
opportunity to the students or students,
accused of ragging" in Regulation 23(2)
makes it more than clear that condemning a
student of any alleged act of ragging is not
permissible
without
affording
him
opportunity of hearing, placing the facts,
making his statement as also confronting
with any material, which is proposed to be
relied upon by the Institution for taking
action against such student.

19. Whether or not the material
available on record forms/constitutes a
conduct on the part of the respondent no. 1petitioner, amounting to ragging, is an issue
which this court while deciding the instant
special appeal does not intend to dwelve
upon for the reason that it is apparent that
the respondent no. 1-petitioner was not
only not confronted with all the material on
the basis of which the impugned action has
precipitated against him, but also that, in
our considered opinion, he has been
deprived of adequate opportunity in terms
of the provisions contained in Regulation
23(2) of the regulations 2021 for putting
forth his case.

20. There is no denial of the fact that
neither the report submitted by the specific
committee nor the report submitted by the
Anti-Ragging Committee on the basis of
which final decision was taken by the
Principal of the Institution on 25.7.2022
was provided to the respondent no. 1petitioner. We also notice that even copies
of the statements made by the complainants
as also by the witnesses were not provided
to the respondent no. 1-petitioner.

21. Regulation 23(2), as quoted
above,
clearly
prescribes
that
inquiry/investigation is to be held giving
adequate
opportunity
to
the
1062 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
student/students, accused of ragging. It also
clearly provides that inquiry/investigation
is to be held in a manner which shall
uphold the principles of Natural Justice.
Holding institutional inquiry/investigation
by the specific committee in terms of
Regulation
23
may
not
be
treated
equivalent to a criminal trial, however,
since the Regulations 2021, contain an
unambiguous and unequivocal mandate
that such inquiry/investigation shall be held
upholding the principles of Natural Justice
and giving adequate opportunity to the
student
accused
of
ragging,
in
our
considered opinion, certain facets of
principles
of
Natural
Justice
while
conducting such an institutional inquiry
need to be followed in every such
inquiry/investigation.

22. We are also conscious of the fact
that ragging in the Medical Colleges and
other colleges of professional studies is a
menace, which is rampant and if it is not
checked appropriately, it causes great
mental,
physical
and
psychological
harassment of the students entering into
such institutions with a hope of completing
their
studies
relating
to
professional
courses. We are also conscious of the fact
that in case any new entrant as a student in
such courses of studies is subjected to
ragging or any other misconduct, that too
by a student who is quite senior to him, the
same may have an impact on him which
may be difficult to erase from his psyche
throughout his life.

23. It is common knowledge that
incidents
of
ragging
and
other
misconducts by seniors in institutions of
vocational studies sometimes have such a
deep and long-lasting adverse impact on
the junior students that it becomes
difficult for such students to come out of
the trauma and agony which may
sometimes hamper his studies and in turn
spoil his future as well. In this view of
the matter, we have no doubt in our mind
that the menace of ragging is to be dealt
with the sternest of measures by the
authorities of the institution as also by
various regulatory authorities like the
Universities and the National Medical
Commission. It is for fulfillment of such
objective that Regulations 2021 have
been framed.

24. Having observed as above, we
may fail in our duty if we do not discuss
the legal protection available to a student,
accused of ragging, when he is subjected to
an inquiry/investigation under Regulation
23(2). The consequence of action against
such a student which may ensue ultimately
under Regulation 24, may be far-reaching
even to the extent that in a given case it
may ruin his career. Having regard to the
seriousness of the consequences in respect
of future career of a student pursuing a
vocational course, we also are of the
opinion that Regulation 23 of 2021
Regulations
ought
to
be
followed
meticulously and in its letter and spirit. It is
only when the Institution/Medical Colleges
strictly follow and act upon the Regulation
23 in its entirety and in its true respect that
a balance between the rights of the students
accused of ragging and a student who is
victim of ragging can be maintained. We
are also conscious of the fact that
Regulations 2021 have been framed and
published only recently as on 18.11.2021
and are, thus, in their nascent stage.
Implementation of Regulations 2021 will
thus require some amount of understanding
as to how the Regulations are to apply not
only as a measure to check the menace of
ragging, but also as a measure to conduct
the inquiry/investigation as contemplated in
10 All. Prin./Chief Medical Superintendent Saraswati Medical College, Unnao & Ors. Vs.
 Mohammad Shakir Hussain & Ors.
1063
Regulation 23 in a fair and appropriate
manner.

25. Since in this case we are primarily
concerned with the nature and kind of
inquiry/investigation to be conducted as
envisaged in Regulation 23 of 2021
Regulations, we find it appropriate to lay
down certain principles as a caution while
conducting the inquiry in such matters, which
are described below.

26. We may make it clear that the
principles as a precautionary measure as are
being laid down by us in this judgment are
only to aid the provisions of 2021
Regulations and they are not in any manner
to supersede or even to supplant the same.
The authorities of a Medical College or any
other Institution are to be primarily, thus,
governed by the statutory regulations namely
Regulations 2021. They may, however, seek
some guidance from our observations, which
are as follows:

(a.) On receiving report of any
misconduct
or
ragging,
the
statutory
mechanism, as provided in 2021 Regulations,
shall be activated immediately, without any
delay of any kind. Once the specific
committee is constituted by the Head of the
Institution to enquire/investigate and report
into the complaint received by the authorities
of the institution, the specific committee, the
Anti-Ragging Committee as also the Head of
the Institution shall maintain complete
confidentiality about the name of the
complainant,
however,
if
it
becomes
necessary to disclose the name during the
course of inquiry, such disclosure shall be
confined only to the Members of the specific
committee, Members of the Anti-Ragging
Committee, Principal of the Institution and if
deemed fit, to the student who is charged
with ragging as well.

(b) On constitution of the specific
committee, the committee shall give notice
to the complainant, witnesses and the
student accused of ragging, for being
present in the inquiry to be conducted by it.
If statement of the complainant or the
witnesses are recorded, the student accused
of ragging, shall be provided with a copy
thereof,
inviting
his
reply
to
such
statements, however, having regard to the
nature of inquiry it will not be permissible
to the student accused of ragging, to crossexamine the complainant/witnesses.

(c) On recording the statement of
the complainant/witnesses opportunity of
making statement in defence shall be
provided to the student against whom the
charge of ragging has been made. The
statement of complainant, that of witnesses,
statement in reply to such statements to be
made by the student accused of ragging, as
also the defence statement of the student
accused of ragging, shall be recorded and
reduced in writing as far as possible on the
same day and if for some reason it is not
possible to record the statement on the
same day, on the next working day.

(d) The specific committee shall
thereafter prepare its report and submit it to
the Anti-Ragging Committee in terms of
the provisions contained in Regulation
23(3) and 23(4) of 2021 Regulations, which
shall submit its report/recommendation to
Head of the Institution as envisaged under
Regulation 23(5).

(e) As observed above in (d), on
receipt
of
report
from
the
specific
committee, the Anti-Ragging Committee
shall examine the report and make
recommendation for further administrative
action to the Head of the Institution.

(f) The Head of the Institution
before taking final decision/action in
terms of Regulation 24 shall provide a
copy
of
the
report/recommendation
1064 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
which may be made by the Anti-Ragging
Committee, to the student facing the
charge of ragging. The Head of the
Institution
will,
thus,
invite
comments/explanation/reply
from
the
student who is accused of ragging on the
report/recommendation which may be
made by the Anti-Ragging Committee
and shall take decision on consideration
of the report/recommendation of the
Anti-Ragging Committee as also the
reply/explanation
which
may
be
submitted by the student accused of
ragging to the report/recommendation of
the Anti-Ragging Committee and other
relevant material which may be available
on record.

(g)
On
receipt
of
report/recommendation made by the
Anti-Ragging Committee, the Head of
the Institution shall give not more than
two days time to the student accused of
ragging
for
furnishing
his
explanation/reply/comments
to
the
report of the Anti-Ragging Committee
and thereupon take a final decision, as
aforesaid.

27.

We
have
evolved
these
guidelines, as already observed above,
not in any manner, in derogation of the
2021 regulations, rather only to facilitate
appropriate
implementation
of
the
Regulations including Regulations 23
and 24 and accordingly our observations
are to be understood in this perspective
and context alone.

28. So far as the facts of the present
case are concerned, it is noticeable that
the respondent no. 1-petitioner was
neither provided the copies of the
statements of the complainant/witnesses
nor was he ever confronted with the
copy of the report said to have been
submitted
by
the
Anti-Ragging
Committee to the Head of the Institution
and accordingly we are of the opinion
that the inquiry as contemplated in
Regulation 23 of 2021 Regulations 2021
against the respondent no. 1-petitioner
be conducted afresh by furnishing him
copy of the complaint, statement of the
complainants and witnesses made before
the Specific Committee on 21.7.2022
and inviting his reply to the same and
permitting him to make statement in his
defence.
Thereafter
the
appellantInstitution shall complete the inquiry in
terms of Regulation 2021 as also
keeping in view the observations made
hereinabove.

We order accordingly.

29. The entire exercise under this
order shall be completed within 15-days
from
today.
The
respondent
no.1petitioner is directed to cooperate fully
with the authorities of the institution and
in case at any point of time he is found
not cooperating with the authorities of
the appellant-Institution, the Institution
shall proceed ahead in terms of the
provisions of the regulations, as clarified
above.

30. The order under appeal dated
13.9.2022 passed by the learned Single
Judge in Writ-C No. 5622 of 2022 is
hereby set aside. The decision of the
Principal
of
the
Institution,
dated
25.7.2022 shall abide by the decision
which may be taken finally in terms of
this order.

31. The special appeal is, thus,
disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

32. There will be no order as to
costs.
10 All. Amar Parasher Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
1065
----------
(2022) 10 ILRA 1065
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 29.08.2022

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE RAJESH BINDAL, C.J.
THE HON'BLE J.J. MUNIR, J.

Special Appeal No. 43 of 2019

Amar Parasher ...Petitioner/Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. & Ors. ...Respondents

Counsel for the Appellant:
Sri Vishnu Shanker Gupta

Counsel for the Respondents:
C.S.C., Sri A.K. Ray, Addl. Chief Standing
Counsel

A.
Service
Law
-
Compassionate
Appointment
-
U.P.
Recruitment
of
Dependents of Government Servants Dying
in Harness Rules, 1974: Rule 5 - While the
right to compassionate appointment is not a
right in the sense a right is understood in
law
stricto
sensu,
it
is
certainly
an
entitlement
which
a
member
of
the
deceased's family eligible, can invoke for
consideration in order to save the family
from debilitating financial distress caused
by the deceased's sudden exit from the
mortal world. The State employer, where there
is a regime for compassionate appointment
introduced by Rules etc., cannot toss a claim by
the deceased's dependent family member by
application of a rigorous Rule of Limitation in a
manner that defeats the very object for which the
regime of compassionate appointment has been
introduced. (Para 17)

The 1974 Rules postulate by presumption that in
the course of 5 years, the deceased's family, by
whatever means, would tide over the financial
crisis caused by the breadwinner's death. The first
proviso to Rule 5(1) of the 1974 Rules
nevertheless acknowledges the possibility that in
the facts of a particular case, the crisis may
continue and unless the rule of limitation is
dispensed with or relaxed to consider the case of a
member
of
the
deceased's
family
for
compassionate appointment, 'undue hardship' may
be caused. To blindfoldedly infer that the family
have tided over the financial crisis within a period
of 5 years, acting on the statutory presumption, is
to defeat the wisdom that the proviso carries.
(Para 17, 23)

B. Burden no doubt lies upon the applicant
for compassionate appointment, where
there is a delay in making the claim,
taking it beyond the period of 5 years, to
make out a case for relaxation by coming
up with a justification for the same.