Harsh v. The Registrar
WP NO. 29016 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 06-08-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN WP NOS. 29016, 29018, 29021, 29023 AND 29024 OF 2025
1. Harsh Petitioner in W.P.No.29016 of 2025 2.Kartik Awasthi Petitioner in W.P.No.29018 of 2025 3.Ayush Pandey Petitioner in W.P.No.29021 of 2025 4.Harshit Gahlot Petitioner in W.P.No.29023 of 2025 5.D. Harsh Petitioner in W.P.No.29024 of 2025 ..Vs...
1. The Registrar, SRM Institute Of Science And Technology, Kattankulathur, Chennai
2. The Dean (CET) SRM Institute Of Science And Technology, Kattankulathur, Chennai Respondent(s) Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to permit the petitioners to write 4th semester and consequently permit the petitioners to attend the classes for the academic year 2025- 2026 and pursue the course pursuant to petitioners' representation dated 30.06.2025 and pass orders accordingly.
For Petitioner(s): M/s. Krishnasamy Chinnasamy For Respondent(s): Dr.V.Venkatesan, S.C., For R1 & R2 (In All W.Ps)
ORDER
The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that all 5 petitioners are studying B.Tech, Computer Science Engineering in the 1st respondent university. He would further submit that they are sincere and hard working students who had not involved in the illegal and unlawful activities. However, the 1st respondent university has passed the expulsion order against the petitioners vide order dated 24.05.2025. In this connection, the petitioners have sent representations dated 30.06.2025 separately to revoke their expulsion order and to allow them to attend lectures and semester exams. Such representations are pending with the respondents without any response.
2.Per contra, the learned Standing counsel appearing for the respondents 1 to 2 would submit that the present writ petition is not maintainable and hence prays to dismiss the same.
3. I have given my anxious consideration having heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
4. Before going into merits of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to answer for the defense raised by the Standing Counsel regarding the maintainability of the writ petition. In this connection, the learned counsel for the petitioners has relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide Judgment dated 15.12.2025 in Civil Appeal No.14553 of 2015 in the case of "Dr. Janet Jeyapaul and SRM University" wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has categorically held that the deemed university will come within the definition of "State" under Article 12 of the Constitution of India. It will be appropriate to refer para No.22 and 23 for ready reference.
22. " This we say for the reasons that firstly, respondent No.1 is engaged in imparting education in higher studies to students at large. Secondly, it is discharging the "public function" by way of imparting education. Thirdly, it is notified as a "Deemed University" by the Central Government under Section 3 of the UGC Act. Fourthly, being a Deemed University, all the provisions of the UGC Act are made applicable to respondent No.1, which inter alia,
provides for effective discharge of he public function - namely education for the benefit of public. Fifthly once respondent No.1 is declared as "Deemed University" whose all functions and activities are governed by the UGC Act, alike other universities then it is an "authority" within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution. Lastly, once it is held to bean "authority" as provided in Article 12 then as a necessary consequence, it becomes amenable to writ jurisdiction of High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution.
23. In the light of forgoing discussion, we cannot concur with the finding rendered by the Division Bench and accordingly, while reversing the finding we hold that the appellant's Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution against respondent No.1 is maintainable.
In view of the aforesaid decision of the Supreme Court, the present Writ petition is maintainable under Article 12 of the Constitution of India. Further, the petitioner prays only to consider their representations dated 30.06.2025 which were sent to the respondents.
5. At this juncture, the learned standing counsel would submit that they will consider the petitioners' representation dated 30.06.2025 on its own merits and pass orders in accordance with law.
6. In such view of the submissions, this Court without going into the merits of the case, deems it appropriate to direct the respondents to consider the petitioners' representation dated 30.06.2025 and pas order within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
7. In the result, these Writ Petitions are disposed of with the aforesaid directions. No costs.
06-08-2025 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Lbm To:
1. The Registrar Srm Institute Of Science And Technology, Kattankulathur, Chennai
2. The Dean (cet) Srm Institute Of Science And Technology, Kattankulathur, Chennai
C.KUMARAPPAN J.
Lbm WP NO. 29016 of 2025 AND WP NO. 29023 OF 2025,WP NO. 29018 OF 2025,WP NO. 29021 OF 2025,WP NO. 29024 OF 2025 06-08-2025