In a recent development, the Allahabad High Court has granted relief to three students of Dr. Ram Manohar Lohiya National Law University (RMLNLU), Lucknow, who were either rusticated or expelled earlier this month. The action was taken against them over alleged misbehaviour with faculty during a fresher’s party. The Court has now allowed them to appear in their upcoming semester examinations.
The case was heard by Justice Jaspreet Singh, who found merit in the students’ claims and noted several lapses in the disciplinary process followed by the university.
“What could not be disputed by the counsel for the University is that there is no material on record to refute the fact that no show cause notice was issued to the petitioners,” the Court observed.
The judge further pointed out that even the final order dated 15.04.2025 was not formally served. Instead, it was sent via WhatsApp, raising questions about the procedural fairness of the university’s actions.
Read also: Mother-in-Law Can File DV Complaint Against Daughter-in-Law: Allahabad High Court Reaffirms
“If the final order could be sent through WhatsApp, then why not the show cause notice as well—especially when email IDs are also available with the university,” the judge added.
The petitioners, including a B.A. LL.B (Hons.) student and two LL.M students, argued that they were not involved in any violent act. While they were present during the protest following a scuffle between students and the hostel warden, they denied any direct misbehaviour. Despite this, they were punished without being given a chance to explain their side.
Advocate Devak Vardhan, appearing for the students, highlighted that as per Section 43 of the Dr. Ram Manohar Lohiya (National Law University U.P. Act), 2005, only the Executive Council can impose rustication based on the Vice Chancellor's report. However, in this case, the orders were allegedly issued by the Chief Proctor, bypassing proper legal procedure.
It was also contended that the university’s academic regulations clearly define disciplinary procedures, which were not followed, leading to a violation of the principles of natural justice.
In response, Advocate Vijay Pratap Singh, representing the university, maintained that the students were found guilty of unruly behaviour by a fact-finding committee and that the action was taken in the larger interest of the institution.
Nonetheless, the Court held that the lack of show cause notices made out a prima facie case in favour of the students and permitted them to sit for their exams.
“At this stage, prima facie the case for interference is made out,” the Court concluded.
The Court has directed the University to file a counter-affidavit within one week, and the matter is scheduled for further hearing on May 5.
