WWW.LIVELAW.IN
W.P(C).No.19716/2019-L
26
or warden or Principal if at all their action was not acceptable to him. Such
practices of humiliating the teachers, that too, in front of the students and the
public is not fair or proper and is not expected from educated parents and hence
deprecated.
However, what is to be considered in this case is the
unreasonableness of the restriction consequent to which the petitioner is expelled.
24.
Regarding the contention of the respondent that any inmate is bound
to abide by the rules and regulations or else she is free to leave the hostel, it is
pertinent to note that rules and regulations require reforms to cope up with the
advancement of technology and the importance of modern technology in day to
day life. As per the University Regulations as well as the UGC Regulations, the
college is bound to run a hostel to enable the students to reside near the college in
order to enable them to have sufficient time to concentrate in their studies.
Therefore, the hostel authorities are expected to enforce only those rules and
regulations for enforcing discipline. Enforcement of discipline shall not be by
blocking the ways and means of the students to acquire knowledge.
25.
In view of the aforesaid reasons, I am of the view that imposing of
such restrictions is unreasonable and therefore the respondent shall re-admit the
petitioner in the hostel without any further delay.
It is made clear that the
petitioner or her parent shall not do any act in a manner humiliating any of the
respondents or any other teacher or warden or Matron in the hostel/college. The
petitioner or any other inmate shall also see that no disturbance is caused to others
by usage of mobile phone in the hostel.
Select target paragraph3
Connect to a paragraph
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Add to table of contents