High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeWrit petitions disposed of; the dictum from the...

W.P.(C) No. 23424 & 24045 of 2019, High Court of Kerala

Case / Petition Number:W.P.(C) Nos. 23424 & 24045 of 2019

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • Basant Balaji
Judgment Date
2023-08-05
Court Decision / Holding
This writ petition is disposed of with a declaration that the dictum laid down in Sojan Francis (2004) 2 KLT 3782, Manager, S.N.M. College (2007) (1) KHC 9, and Antony Thomas v. Muhammed Rafique (2017) (4) KLT 586 will apply to the petitioners’ colleges. The court directs the Director General of Police to ensure compliance and provides adequate protection to petitioners, stating that Students Unions have no right to set up units within college campuses and no right to start union activities on campus in violation of the cited judgments. Writ petitions are disposed of.
Final Disposition
Writ petitions disposed of; the dictum from the cited judgments applies to the petitioners’ colleges; police protection to be provided as needed.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • The VNS College of Arts and Science, Konni
  • The Principal, The VNS College of Arts and Science, Konni
  • The Mannam Memorial NSS College, Konni
  • The Principal, Mannam Memorial NSS College, Konni

Respondents

  • The State of Kerala represented by its Chief Secretary
  • The Mahatma Gandhi University represented by its Registrar
  • The District Police Chief, Pathanamthitta
  • The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Pathanamthitta
  • The Circle Inspector of Police, Konni
  • The Students Federation of India (SFI) represented by its Unit Secretary Ameera S.
  • The Akhila Bharathiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP) represented by its Unit Secretary
  • The Kerala Students Union (KSU) represented by its Unit Secretary

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • D. Kishore
  • • Mini Gopinath
  • • Meera Gopinath
  • • R. Muraleekrishnan (Malakkara)
  • • Smt. Mini Gopinath
  • • Smt. Meera Gopinath
  • • Smt. R. Muraleekrishnan (Malakkara)

Counsels for Respondents

  • • Asok M. Cherian, SC, M.G. University
  • • Manu Ramachandran
  • • M. Kiranlal
  • • T. S. Sarath
  • • R. Rajesh (Varkala)
  • • Ajay Jayachandran

Case Synopsis & Summary

The writ petitions challenge the right of student unions to set up units and to conduct political activities inside college campuses. The petitioners are two colleges and their principals seeking a declaration that the respondents and any political student unions or organizations have no right to establish units within the college campuses or to organize strikes, dharnas, banners, or other political activity on campus, as such conduct disrupts classes and campus life. The Court traces a line of jurisprudence starting with Sojan Francis (Kerala Students Union v. Sojan Francis, 2004 (2) KLT 3782) which held that private managements may prohibit political activities within campus and ban non-official meetings, and reaffirmed in Manager, S.N.M. College & SNMIMT, Maliankara (2007 (1) KHC 9) that campuses may restrict student politics. The State’s countervailing view—protecting democratic rights and student expression through regulated channels—is referenced, including Haripal Singh v. Devinder Singh (1997) 6 SCC 660 (cautionary on campus politics) and Antony Thomas v. Muhammed Rafique (2017 (4) KLT 586). The Court concludes the issue is substantially decided by the cited judgments and disposes of the petitions, declaring that the dictum in the aforementioned decisions applies to the petitioners’ colleges. It directs police protection and compliance with Conduct Rules and University Statutes, effectively restricting campus political activities and units in these colleges.

Provisions of Law Cited

Mahatma Gandhi University Students Code of Conduct RulesConduct Rules framed by the M.G. UniversityUniversity Statutes

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

  • Contempt of Court
  • Right of management to prohibit campus political activities (as recognized in Sojan Francis, 2004; Manager, 2007)

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners contend that educational institutions have the right to prohibit political activities within campus, including setting up student unions and organizing meetings, demonstrations, or banners inside college premises, to maintain discipline and the academic environment. They rely on the Court’s earlier decisions in Sojan Francis (2004) and Manager, S.N.M. College (2007) that private managements may restrict campus politics, and request police protection to enforce these prohibitions and to prevent contempt if violated.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents emphasize that student politics is a democratic right and should be regulated rather than banned outright. They point to the Government’s measures and the University statutes/conduct rules as a framework to balance rights with discipline, arguing for safeguards that allow expression within codes of conduct and statutorily prescribed channels. They rely on court decisions acknowledging campus politics and the need for governance to prevent disruption, while urging adherence to established statutes and rules.

Cited Precedents (4)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Kerala Students Union v. Sojan Francis2004 (2) KLT 3782PositivePivotal authority establishing the power of management to prohibit campus political activities and to restrict student unions within college campuses; followed by the present decision.
Manager, S.N.M. College & SNMIMT, Maliankara & Ors v. The SI of Police & Ors2007(1) KHC 9PositiveAffirms the right of educational institutions to prohibit political activities on campus, reinforcing the Sojan Francis line.
Haripal Singh v. Devinder Singh1997 6 SCC 660Mentioned OnlyCited to illustrate concerns about campus politics but not adopted as controlling rule.
Antony Thomas v. Muhammed Rafique2017 (4) KLT 586Mentioned OnlyCited as part of the broader discussion; not the primary basis for the decision.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against W.P.(C) No. 23424 & 24045 of 2019, High Court of Kerala and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

# **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** # **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI ``` ``` SATURDAY, THE 5[TH] DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 14TH SRAVANA, 1945 ``` ## **`WP(C) NO. 24045 OF 2019`** ## **`PETITIONER/S:`** ``` 1THE VNS COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCE, KONNI, KONNAPPARA, ATHUMPUMKULAM P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-689692, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN- N.SIVARAMAN, AGED 70 YEARS, S/O.NARAYANAN NAIR, RESIDING AT USHAS, PERUMPULICKAL, MANNAM NAGAR P.O., PANDALAM, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN-689501. ``` ``` 2THE PRINCIPAL, THE VNS COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCE, KONNI, KONNAPPARA, ATHUMPUMKULAM P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-689692. BY ADVS. D.KISHORE MINI GOPINATH MEERA GOPINATH R.MURALEEKRISHNAN ``` ## **`RESPONDENT/S:`** - `1 THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.` - `2 THE MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, PRIYADARSHINI HILLS, ATHIRAMPUZHA P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN-686562.` - `3 THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF, OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT CHIEF, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN-689645.` - `4 THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, THAZHOORKADAVU ROAD, PATHANAMTHITTA-689645.` - `5 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KONNI POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN689691.` - `6 THE STUDENTS FEDERATION OF INDIA (SFI), VNS COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCE, KONNI, KONNAPPARA, ATHUMPUMKULAM P.O.,PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-689692, REPRESENTED BY ITS UNIT SECRETARY, AMEER S., S/O.SHAHUL HAMEED, RESIDING AT POTTAKKUNNEL HOUSE, KONNI, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN-689691.` - `7 THE AKHILA BHARATHIYA VIDYARTHI PARISHAD (ABVP), VNS COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCE, KONNI, KONNAPPARA,` ``` W.P.(C) No. 23424 & 24045 of 2019 ``` ``` 2 ``` ``` ATHUMPUMKULAM P.O.,PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-689692, REPRESENTED BY ITS UNIT SECRETARY, SACHIN S., S/O.SATHEESAN P., RESIDING AT SATHEESH BHAVANAM, MARUR P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN-691524. 8THE KERALA STUDENTS UNION (KSU), VNS COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCE, KONNI, KONNAPPARA, ATHUMPUMKULAM P.O.,PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-689692, REPRESENTED BY ITS UNIT SECRETARY, JAYAKRISHNAN S., S/O.SAJI J., RESIDING AT GEETHANJALI, MARUR P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN-691524. BY ADVS. SRI.MANU RAMACHANDRAN SRI.M.KIRANLAL SRI.T.S.SARATH SRI.R.RAJESH (VARKALA) SHRI.AJAY JAYACHANDRAN ``` ## **`OTHER PRESENT:`** ``` GP V. K SUNIL, SRI. SURIN GEORGE IPE - SC ``` ``` THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.08.2023, ALONG WITH WP(C).23424/2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` W.P.(C) No. 23424 & 24045 of 2019 ``` ``` 3 ``` ## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI SATURDAY, THE 5[TH] DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 14TH SRAVANA, 1945 ``` ## **`WP(C) NO. 23424 OF 2019`** ## **`PETITIONER/S:`** - `1 THE MANNAM MEMORIAL N.S.S. COLLEGE KONNI, PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN-689 691, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN C.N. SOMANADHAN NAIR, AGED 67 YEARS, S/O NARAYANAN NAIR, RESIDING AT KARTHIKA, KODUMTHARAM, PATHANAMTHITTA P.O.PIN-689 645.` ``` 2THE PRINCIPAL, MANNAM MEMORIAL N.S.S.COLLEGE, KONNI, PATHANAMTHITT, PIN-689 691. BY ADVS. D.KISHORE SMT.MINI GOPINATH SMT.MEERA GOPINATH SRI.R.MURALEEKRISHNAN (MALAKKARA) ``` ## **`RESPONDENT/S:`** - `1 THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.` - `2 THE MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, PRIYADARSHINI HILLS, ATHIRAMPUZHA P.O.KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN-686 562.` - `3 THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF, OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT CHIEF, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN-689 645.` - `4 THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, THAZHOORKADAVU ROAD, PATHANAMTHITTA-689 645.` - `5 THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KONNI POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN-689 691.` - `6 THE STUDENTS FEDERATION OF INDIA(SFI), MANNAM MEMORIAL NSS COLLEGE UNIT, KONNI, PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN-689 691 REPRESENTED BY ITS UNIT SECRETARY, MELBIN SIBI RESIDING AT SANGOOR HOUSE, MALLASSERY P.O.PRAMADAM VILLAGE, KONNI TALUK,` ``` W.P.(C) No. 23424 & 24045 of 2019 ``` ``` 4 ``` ``` PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN-689 646. 7THE AKHILA BHARATHIYA VIDYARTHI PARISHAD (ABVP), MANNAM MEMORIAL NSS COLLEGE UNIT, KONNI, PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN-689 691 REPRESENTED BY ITS UNIT SECRETARY, VISHNU M.S RESIDING AT MULLASSERIL, PATHALIL, KADAMMANITTA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN - 689 649. 8THE KERALA STUDENTS UNION (KSU), MANNAM MEMORIAL NSS COLLEGE UNIT, KONNI, PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN-689 691 REPRESENTED BY ITS UNIT SECRETARY, SOORAJ T. PRAKASH RESIDING AT UTHRAM NIVAS, MEKOZHOOR P.O.MYLAPRA VILLAGE, KONNI TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN-689 678 BY ADVS. SRI.ASOK M. CHERIAN, SC, M.G. UNIVERSITY SRI.MANU RAMACHANDRAN SRI.M.KIRANLAL SRI.T.S.SARATH SRI.R.RAJESH (VARKALA) SHRI.AJAY JAYACHANDRAN ``` ``` THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.08.2023, ALONG WITH WP(C).24045/2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` W.P.(C) No. 23424 & 24045 of 2019 ``` ``` 5 ``` ## **`J U D G M E N T`** ## **`(Dated this the 4[th] day of August, 2023)`** ``` The petitioners in both these writ petitions are two colleges as well as the principals. They have approached this Court for a declaration that the respondents or any other political student unions or organisations have no right to set up their units within the college campus of the petitioners and they do not have any right to conduct strikes, demonstrations, agitations or dharnas inside the college campus or to bring into college campus any banner, flag, board, notice, pamphlets or such other material for purpose of any political activity or to indulge in any activity which may cause disruption to classes or disturbance in the college campus, as per law laid down by this Court in various decisions. ``` ``` 2. This Court has, in 2004 itself, had took up the issue whether an educational institution has got freedom to prohibit political activities ``` ``` W.P.(C) No. 23424 & 24045 of 2019 ``` ``` 6 ``` ``` within the college campus and forbid the students from organising or attending meetings other than official ones within college campus. ``` ``` 3.The Division Bench of this Court in KeralaStudents Union Vs. Sojan Francis reported in2004 (2) KLT 378 in para 30 and 31 has declared as follows:- ``` ``` 30. We need not labour much on the meaning of the word "politics", "political activities" or "political activism". The Managements have taken up a clear stand what is bothering them and the teaching faculty is the interference of students organizations like SFI, ABVP, KSU, etc. within the campus directly and through member students and also the constant strike, dharna, gherao etc. indulged in by the students within the campus. Students can, according to them, voice their opinion on any political issue in the various forums ear marked to them under the University Statutes, but not through the organizations which have not been recognised either by University Statutes, State Government or by the educational institutions. ``` ``` 31. The Principal Secretary, Education, Government of Kerala in the counter affidavit has suggested various measures to maintain discipline in the educational institutions in the State. In sub para 3 of para 7 of the counter affidavit filed by theState Government it is stated that political activity shall not be allowed in the campos and demonstration, campaign, rioting etc. shall not be allowed. Further it is also stated no banners, flags, posters etc. should be allowed inside the campus. Sub para (11) of para 7 it is stated that specific conditions of admission and terms of a code of conduct shall be included in the college ``` ``` W.P.(C) No. 23424 & 24045 of 2019 ``` ``` 7 ``` ``` calendar and an undertaking be obtained from the students and parents. The Principal Secretary to Education Department also stated in the counter affidavit that the Government would implement those measures based on the directions of this court. Measures suggested by the State Government are to be welcomed while upholding the right of the Managements to stall organizational activities of students organizations like SFI, ABVP, KSU etc. directly or through their member students within the campus. Strike, dharna, gherao etc. indulged in by the students the campus can also be prevented and State Government and the Universities have got a legal obligation to protect the rights of not only the Management, Principal and the teaching faculty of the affiliating colleges but also that of Government owned colleges and educational institutions and to take appropriate measures to enforce those rights. In the decision of the Apex Court in Haripal Singh v. Devinder Singh (1997) 6 SCC 660), Thomas, J. in his inimitable style has highlighted the bane of campus politics which resulted in the death of a student studying in the final year M.A. Economics. Measures suggested by the State Government, in our view, would strengthen the Managements and Principals to enforce the discipline. ``` ``` 4.Thereafter in 2007, this Court was called upon with another question regarding ‘Campus Politics’ whether the students unions have right to set up their units within the college campus. This Court in Manager, S.N.M. College & SNMIMT, Maliankara & Ors V. The S.I.of Police & Ors reported in 2007(1) KHC 9 has held as follows:- ``` ``` W.P.(C) No. 23424 & 24045 of 2019 ``` ``` 8 ``` ``` 8. We find in spite of the declaration of law laid down by this Court in Sojan Francis' case, supra that private managements and educational institutions have the right to prohibit political activities within the college campus and forbid students from organising or attending meetings other than the official ones, those directions are not being followed in some of the colleges just like in the present case. Students organisations even after the guidelines laid down by this Court in Sojan Francis case, supra, are still creating disturbances in the college campus. We make it clear as and when complaint is received from the Management or Principal of an educational Institution in the State the police has got a duty to act and see that those students organisation be kept away from the college campus. Students Unions have no right to set up their units within the college campus. Students Federation of India or other Students Unions have no right to start their Union activities within the college campus since they are bound by the judgment of this Court. If the Union starts any such activities within the college campus in violation of the decision of this Court reported in 2004 (2) KLT 3782 and the rules framed by the University, the Management can approach the police officials who will see that such attempts are averted failing which appropriate action would be taken for contempt of Court proceedings. ``` ``` 9. This writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Director General of Police to see that the judgment of this Court in Kerala Students Union v. Sojan Francis, 2004 (2) KLT 3782 and the Conduct Rules framed by the M.G. University are scrupulously followed. Respondents 1 and 2 would give adequate and effective protection to the petitioners as and when requested. ``` ``` W.P.(C) No. 23424 & 24045 of 2019 ``` ``` 9 ``` ``` 5.Even after declaration by this Court in Sojan Francis and Manager, S.N.M. College,this Court had to take up the issue again in 2017 in Antony Thomas Vs. Muhammed Rafiquereported in 2017 (4) KLT 586. ``` ``` Thus it can be seen that the issue has been substantially decided by this Court in the above mentioned judgments. Therefore these writ petitions are disposed of declaring that the dictum laid down by this Court in the above judgments will be apply to the petitioners’ college also. ``` ``` The Writ petitions are disposed of. ``` ``` Sd/- ``` ``` BASANT BALAJI, JUDGE ``` ``` SM ``` ``` W.P.(C) No. 23424 & 24045 of 2019 ``` ``` 10 ``` ## **`APPENDIX OF WP(C) 23424/2019`** |`PETITIONER EXHIBITS`|| |---|---| |`EXHIBIT P1`|`TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 12.8.2015 IN`| ||`WPC 24582/2015 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT.`| |`EXHIBIT P2`|`TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED NIL SUBMITTED`| ||`BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND PETITIONER`| |`EXHIBIT P2`|`THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P2.`| |`EXHIBIT P3`|`TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 5.7.2019`| ||`SUBMITTED BY THE 7TH RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND`| ||`PETITIONER`| |`EXHIBIT P4`|`THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P4`| |`EXHIBIT P4`|`TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 5.7.2019`| ||`SUBMITTED BY THE 8TH RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND`| ||`PETITIONER`| |`EXHIBIT P5`|`TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 15.7.2019`| ||`SUBMITTED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND`| ||`PETITIONER`| |`EXHIBIT P5`|`THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P5`| |`EXHIBIT P6`|`TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 1.8.2019 ISSUED`| ||`BY THE 7TH RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND PETITIONER`| |`EXHIBIT P6`|`THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P6`| |`EXHIBIT P7`|`TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 19.7.2019`| ||`SUBMITTED BY THE 8TH RESPONDENT TO THE 2NDE`| ||`PETITIONER`| |`EXHIBIT P7`|`THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P7`| |`EXHIBIT P8`|`THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P8`| |`EXHIBIT P8`|`TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 30.7.2019`| ||`ISSUED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER TO THE`| ||`RESPONDENTS 6 TO 8`| |`EXHIBIT P9`|`TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED`| ||`2.8.2019 SUBMITTED BY THE 223 PARENTS BEFORE`| ||`THE CHAIRMAN OF THE 1ST PETITIONER COLLEGE`| |`EXHIBIT P9`|`THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P9`| |`EXHIBIT P10`|`TRUE COPY OF THE MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY`| ||`STUDENTS CODE OF CONDUCT RULES`| |`RESPONDENT EXHIBITS`|| |`EXHIBIT R6(a)`|`THE TRUE COPY OF THE CONSTITUTION OF STUDENTS`| ||`FEDERATION OF INDIA.`| ``` W.P.(C) No. 23424 & 24045 of 2019 ``` ``` 11 ``` ## **`APPENDIX OF WP(C) 24045/2019`** ``` PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 8.8.2019 SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER BEFORE THE MANAGEMENT OF THE 1ST PETITIONER COLLEGE. EXHIBIT P2TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 19.8.2019 SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3TRUE COPY OF THE E-MAIL COMMUNICATION DATED 20.08.2019 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 26.8.2019 ISSUED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT 6 TO 8. EXHIBIT P4THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXHIBIT P4. EXHIBIT P5TRUE COPY OF THE MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY STUDENTS' CODE OF CONDUCT RULES. RESPONDENT EXHIBITS EXHIBIT R6 ATHE TRUE COPY OF THE CONSTITUTION OF STUDENTS FEDERATION OF INIDA ``` ## **`TRUE COPY`** ## **`P.A.TO JUDGE`**