Divyansh Rustagi v. The Registrar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated:28.01.2026 Coram:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY W.P.Nos.1685, 1687, 1695 and 1691 of 2026 and W.M.P.Nos.1759,1753,1757,1767,1745,1765,1751,1752, 1761,1763,1750,and 1748 of 2026 W.P.No.1685 of 2026:
Divyansh Rastagi, S/o Manoj Kumar Rastogi, D 36, Pocket R, Dilshad Garden, Jhimil, East Delhi 110 095.
.. Petitioner /versus/ .. Respondent Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus quashing the impugned communication No.SRMIST/Reg./stu.tap.13047-Estt/2025/4315 dated 16.12.2025 passed by the respondent University and consequently direct the respondent University to reinstate the petitioner and permit the petitioner to continue his studies. For Petitioner :Mr. V.Chandrasekaran
For Respondent :Dr.V.Venkatesan W.P.No.1687 of 2026:
Urkarsh Mehta, S/o Rajnish Mehta, Flat No.602, Tower B7, RPS Sawana Sector-88, Kherikalan(113), Faridabad District, Haryana-121 203.
.. Petitioner /versus/ .. Respondent Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus quashing the impugned communication No.SRMIST/Reg./stu.tap.13047-Estt./2025/4315 dated 16.12.2025 passed by the respondent University and consequently direct the respondent University to reinstate the petitioner and permit the petitioner to continue his studies. For Petitioner :Mr. V.Chandrasekaran For Respondent :Dr.V.Venkatesan W.P.No.1691 of 2026:
Nilaksh Jaiswarl S/o Jyoti Shankar In front of Housing Board Colony, Jhalawar Road, Baran, Rajasthan 325 205.
.. Petitioner /versus/ .. Respondent Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus quashing the impugned communication No.SRMIST/Reg./stu.tap.13047-Estt./2025/4315 dated 16.12.2025 passed by the respondent University and consequently direct the respondent University to reinstate the petitioner and permit the petitioner to continue his studies. For Petitioner :Mr. V.Chandrasekaran For Respondent :Dr.V.Venkatesan W.P.No.1695 of 2026:
Sidak Singh S/o Satyendra Singh, GN Auto Diesels,
Opp.To Chauhan Petrol Pump, Badhauli Chowk, Main Road, Robertsganj, Sonebhadra, Uttar Pradesh 231 216.
.. Petitioner /versus/ .. Respondent Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus quashing the impugned communication No.SRMIST/Reg./stu.tap.13047-Estt./2025/4315, dated 16.12.2025 passed by the respondent University and consequently direct the respondent University to reinstate the petitioner and permit the petitioner to continue his studies. For Petitioner :Mr. V.Chandrasekaran For Respondent :Dr.V.Venkatesan COMMON ORDER All the writ petitions are connected and as such, they are taken up together and disposed of by a common order.
2. In all these writ petitions, they are calling into question the order passed by the first respondent-University, thereby the students were expelled from the Institution. Without going into the details of the stand taken by the petitioner as well as the stand taken by the college, upon considering the arguments of both the learned counsel for the petitioner and more specifically the arguments of the learned counsel for the Institution, I am of the view that if the students can be directed to approach the appellate authority, as per paragraph No.7 of the counter affidavit. There is an appeal process at Stage-I and Stage-II. The appellate committee, consisting of the Vice Chancellor, Registrar and Pro-Vice Chancellor, headed by the Vice Chancellor, is entitled to reconsider the issue.
I am of the view that, while there can be no two opinions that disciplinary action commensurate with the level of misconduct has to be taken, the authorities shall do well to also take into account the fact that the entire career of the students itself should not be put to jeopardy once and for all. By exercise of the appellate power, if a win-win situation could be arrived at, that is the college should also be seen as maintaining student discipline, at the same time, it should not permanently jeopardise the career of the students and an appropriate punishment/decision can be taken by the appellate authority.
3. As per procedure, let the students make a request to the Registrar today itself, without waiting for the certified copy of this order. The students, as well as the parents,
who are present before the Court, shall proceed straight to the Institution and make a representation to the Registrar to reconsider the punishment, that is imposed by them, by submitting the appeal, as per the appellate process. It is made clear that any averments made in the appeal will not be taken as if they have admitted guilt and no prejudice will be caused on account of any of the averments made in the petition for appeal. The appellate authority shall as early as possible, depending on their convenience and take a decision, in the best interest of the institution as well as the students also.
4. As observed supra, an effort must be made so that, the students continue their education, but with the kind of punishment, that may be deemed appropriate by the appellate authority. The appellate authority can also consider, whether the period of suspension itself can be treated as punishment. At the end of the day, it is their call as to what further directions can be issued and what kind of punishment will be imposed.
5. It is also brought to the notice of the Court that tomorrow (i.e) 30.01.2026 is the last date for applying for the examinations. The Registrar can also issue directions to the students either to apply, pending the decision of the appellate committee or, depending on the ultimate decision of the appellate committee, they can be permitted to
apply on an extended date also, subject to their fulfilment of other criteria. It is also made clear that this will not be taken as a precedent and this Court has passed the order, considering the extraordinary situation, the nature of misconduct and the fact that the student concerned has also forgiven the petitioners by filing a compromise petition on the file of the this Court while considering the criminal case. The endeavour of the Court is to see that the reputation of the institution should not be lost and at the same time, that the students should also not be permanently jeopardised, considering their age and the manner in which these disputes arise between the students. Keeping that in the background, the authorities may take a decision, as expeditiously as possible. The authorities shall act on the web copy of the order without waiting for the certified copy of the order.
6. With the above observations, these Writ Petitions are disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. 28.01.2026 ari To
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY,J.
ari
W.P.Nos.1685, 1687, 1695 and 1691 of 2026 and W.M.P.Nos.1759,1753,1757,1767,1745,1765,1751,1752, 1761,1763,1750,and 1748 of 2026 28.01.2026