The Madras High Court stayed suspension of a Muslim research scholar of a state-run unviversity. (File Photo)
The Madras High Court on Tuesday stayed suspension of a Muslim research scholar of a state-run unviversity, holding that the action was taken on a suspicious criminal case and it went against the government's push for inclusiveness of minorities and Dalits in higher education.
Passing interim orders on a petition by Mohamed Khan, challenging the action against him, Justice D Hariparanthaman also stayed a showcause notice issued by the Registrar of the Tirunelveli-based Manonmaniam Sundaranar University, seeking the student's explanation for his alleged criminal act.
The Judge held that the Registrar had passed the suspension order based on a "suspicious criminal" case.
The petitioner was a self-employed person who had come up the ladder working as a 'parota master' (cook), the Judge said, adding the action taken by the university was against the policy of the union government which wanted participation of members from SC, ST and minority communities in higher education.
The student, suspended on October 1 last year, claimed a "false" complaint was lodged against him as he had sought details about some funds transactions and alleged 'illegal' absorption of Assistant Professors.
According to the complaint, the student had entered the room of Assistant Professor Dr Jaishankar and allegedly abused him. He was also charged with closing and latching the room door while going out after Dr Jaishankar and some of his colleagues questioned his behaviour.
The Judge said the alleged incident took place on September 1, 2015 while the FIR was registered on September 25. No reason was given for the inordinate delay, he said, adding "delay is fatal to the criminal proceedings".
The Judge also said the complaint was given by an Assistant Professor and not an illiterate. It had not been explained why did he lodge the complaint 25 days after the incident.
The petitioner said the delayed FIR should not be relied on to take punitive action against him. The Judge said the showcause notice mentioned that the petitioner had threatened the Assitant Professor with a knife, but it was not stated in the FIR or in the complaint.
The Assitant Registrar, who was present in the court, said they had not enquired about the incident from other professors who were in the room of Dr Jaishankar.