The Kerala High Court has set aside a single judge's interim order permitting 16 suspended students of Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit, Kalady, to appear for examinations scheduled to begin on November 4, 2026. The Division Bench held that the relief granted by the single judge could not be sustained under the applicable examination regulations.
Background
The dispute arose from a student protest held on August 13, 2026, during a Syndicate meeting at the university. The university alleged that protesters staged a symbolic funeral of the Vice-Chancellor and subsequently obstructed and assaulted her. Two FIRs were registered following the incident.
On September 1, the university suspended 16 students and initiated disciplinary proceedings. Although an enquiry committee heard the students on September 29 and 30, its report could not be placed before the Syndicate due to procedural issues.
The students subsequently approached the High Court, challenging their continued suspension. On October 30, a single judge directed the university to accept their examination fees and provisionally permit them to appear for the examinations.
Challenging this direction, the university argued that the examination registration deadline had expired on October 23. It also pointed out that several students did not satisfy the mandatory 80% attendance requirement or complete the prescribed internal assessments.
The Division Bench of Justice Anil K. Narendran and Justice Muralee Krishna S. found merit in the university's submissions.
The Court observed:
"The learned Single Judge granted an interim order permitting the petitioners to appear for the examination without even insisting that they submit an application for registration for the examination or an application for condonation of shortage of attendance, if any."
The Bench further noted that the interim relief virtually amounted to granting the main relief sought in the pending petition.
It also observed that the university's standing counsel was not given an opportunity to obtain instructions before the interim order was passed.
Allowing the university's appeal, the Division Bench set aside the October 30 interim order.
"The said interim order cannot be sustained in law. We find no reason to sustain the impugned order of the learned Single Judge."
The Court clarified that its observations were limited to deciding the appeal and would not affect the merits of the dispute pending before the single judge.
