High Court · 2025

Cont.P.(MD)No.1226 of 2025BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURTDATED : 21.07.2025CORAM:THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIVEK KUMAR SINGHCont.P.(MD)No.1226 of 2025inW.P.(MD) No.30841 of 2024R.V.Renish... Petitioner Vs.1.Dr.P.Senthilkumar I.A.S., The Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department, Fort St. George, Secretariat, Chennai-600 009.2.J.Sangumani, The Director, Director of Medical Education, No.162, EVR Periyar Salai, Kilpauk, Chennai-600 010.3.Dr.Siva Sangeetha, The Registrar, Dr.M.G.R. Medical University, Guindy, Chennai – 600 032.____________Page 1 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Cont.P.(MD)No.1226 of 20254.R.Revathi, The Principal, Velammal College of Nursing, Thoothukudi Ring Road, Anuppanadi, Madurai – 625 009.... RespondentsPRAYER:- Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 to punish the Contemnors / respondents for willful disobedience of order of this Honourable court passed in WP(MD) No. 30841 of 2024 dated 14.02.2025. For Petitioner : Mr.G.ArumugarajaFor Respondent : Mr.M.SiddharthanNos.1 & 2 Additional Government PleaderFor Respondent No.4 :Mr.L.Shaji ChellanO R D E RThe instant contempt petition has been filed alleging wilful disobedience of the order of this Court dated 14.02.2025 passed in W.P. (MD)No.30841 of 2024.____________Page 2 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Cont.P.(MD)No.1226 of 20252. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, although this Court had passed an order on 17.07.2025 directing the fourth respondent to re-admit the petitioner and permit him to continue the course, the fourth respondent has not complied with the said direction till date. 3. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the fourth respondent College, submitted that, at the outset, it is reiterated that the fourth respondent institution has the highest regard for the authority of this Court and is fully conscious of its duty to act in accordance with any directions issued by this Court. However, it is fervently submitted that, while complying with such directions, the institution is also under an obligation to maintain academic discipline, integrity and standards within its campus. In the present case, the petitioner has unfortunately exhibited a pattern of behaviour that is inconsistent with the standards expected of a student enrolled in a higher educational institution. The petitioner has been issued with multiple warnings for various acts of indiscipline. The institution has, at every stage, provided the petitioner with opportunities to correct such conduct and ____________Page 3 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Cont.P.(MD)No.1226 of 2025reintegrate in accordance with the norms expected from all the students. Despite this, the petitioner continued to engage in disruptive conduct that posed a challenge not only to the administrative machinery but also affected the academic atmosphere of the institution. 4. The learned counsel for the fourth respondent also brought to the notice of this Court that the petitioner, on his own volition, has sought and obtained a Transfer Certificate from the fourth respondent institution and has secured admission in another college in Chennai. This conduct makes it abundantly clear that the petitioner, by voluntarily exiting the institution, has already chosen an alternate academic pathway and thereby implicitly accepted the consequences of their conduct. In the light of the foregoing facts, it is humbly submitted that any allegation that seeks to portray the institution in a negative light or attempts to mislead this Court with respect to the petitioner’s past conduct must be viewed with due circumspection. The institution has acted fairly, proportionately and in the best interests of its academic community. Therefore, it is respectfully prayed that this Court may be pleased to take note of the factual matrix and decline any relief sought by the ____________Page 4 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Cont.P.(MD)No.1226 of 2025petitioner which would undermine the authority of the institution in enforcing discipline and upholding academic standards.5. At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, pursuant to the earlier orders of this Court, the writ petitioner had obtained a Transfer Certificate from the college in Chennai and is now seeking re-admission into the fourth respondent institution. 6. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record.7. The grievance of the petitioner is that the directions issued by this Court in the earlier proceedings have not been complied with by the respondent institution, thereby amounting to willful disobedience, giving rise to the present contempt petition. The institution asserts that adequate opportunities were provided to the petitioner to correct his behaviour, but the conduct remained consistently disruptive and detrimental to the academic environment. Moreover, it must be borne in mind that the interest of ____________Page 5 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Cont.P.(MD)No.1226 of 2025maintaining discipline and academic decorum within an educational institution cannot be compromised. If relief in the nature sought by the petitioner were to be granted, it would set a precedent that could embolden individual students to defy institutional rules, in the belief that they may later seek intervention of the Court to compel re-admission or override internal disciplinary processes. 8. It is neither practical nor reasonable to expect that an entire institution be penalized or compelled to accommodate one student at the cost of its larger administrative and academic functioning. It is further submitted and not disputed, that the petitioner had voluntarily applied for and obtained a transfer certificate from the institution and has since joined another college in Chennai to continue his academic pursuits. Therefore, in view of the fact that the petitioner has already secured admission in another college and has chosen to continue his studies there, the question of reinstatement in the respondent institution does not survive. ____________Page 6 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Cont.P.(MD)No.1226 of 20259. In view of the foregoing reasons and considering the larger interest of the institution and the student community as a whole, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the case of the petitioner. However, it is made clear that the petitioner shall be at liberty to continue his studies in the college at Chennai, where he has already secured admission, without prejudice to any other rights that may be available to him. 10. With the above observations, this contempt petition stands dismissed. 21.07.2025Index : Yes / No NCC : Yes / NoOrder : Speaking / Non SpeakingPKN____________Page 7 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Cont.P.(MD)No.1226 of 2025To1.Dr.P.Senthilkumar I.A.S., The Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department, Fort St. George, Secretariat, Chennai-600 009.2.J.Sangumani, The Director, Director of Medical Education, No.162, EVR Periyar Salai, Kilpauk, Chennai-600 010.3.Dr.Siva Sangeetha, The Registrar, Dr.M.G.R. Medical University, Guindy, Chennai – 600 032.____________Page 8 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Cont.P.(MD)No.1226 of 2025VIVEK KUMAR SINGH , J. PKNCont.P.(MD)No.1226 of 202521.07.2025____________Page 9 of 9