The five students acknowledged that they had taken certain food items from the kiosks, such as chocolates and chips, but they insisted that they believed these products had been left unattended.
 |
| Not only did they return the products right away, but they also sent written apologies. (Facebook) |
The two students from the Birla Institute of Technology and Science in Goa were ordered to perform community service for two months, two hours a day, by the Bombay High Court in Goa on Monday, nullifying the suspension.
The kids were purportedly discovered taking desk lamps, chocolates, pens, and other goods from the college campus vendors.
Along with three other people, Vuribindi Mokshith Reddy and Karri Kishore Ramachandra Reddy, who were 18 and 19 years old, respectively, were caught stealing.
Initially, during semester I (2023–24) and two subsequent semesters, all five students were prohibited from registering.
However, the three other students, the appeal authority lowered the penalty of cancellation of semesters but kept the fine of ₹50,000.
The five students, who also included the petitioners, acknowledged that they had taken various food items from the stalls, such as chocolates and chips, as well as other items, such as speakers and phone stands. However, they insisted that they thought the items had been put there by mistake.
Not only did they return the products right away, but they also sent written letters of apology.
But in the case of the two petitioners, the director upheld the ₹50,000 fine and the termination of the semester, which prompted them to file a high court plea.
The chief justice of the Bombay High Court's Goa division bench expressed disappointment that the institute's director and senior professor refused to lessen the punishment given, stating that "any reduction of punishment, at this stage, will encourage students to seek Court intervention against decisions given by the Institute, undermining the time-tested disciplinary system of the Institute," in spite of the high court's prodding.
"To put it mildly, this should not have been the approach of the Director, particularly when dealing with two 18-year-old students from his Institute," the HC division bench stated. "The primary reason for not being merciful or for almost ignoring the reformative aspect, so clearly emphasised by the UGC guidelines, was the apprehension that students would seek Court intervention against the Institute's decision and such Court intervention would undermine the disciplinary systems of the Institute."
The HC further stated, "Although we are hurt by this approach of the Director of an Institute of Eminence, we refrain from saying anything more because we are mindful that the two petitioners before us have to complete their education with the respondents for the next few years and not be scarred for life due to the indiscretion or even indiscipline indulged by them on this one occasion. It almost seemed as though the Director was irritated that these two petitioners had dared to seek Court intervention against his decision.
The high court also felt that it was necessary to intervene "when it is found there is discrimination in a matter of imposition of penalties or, where the penalties imposed are in breach of the guidelines enacted by the Institute itself or where the penalty imposed excludes considerations of reformation," despite the fact that it is "conscious that Courts normally do not interfere with the quantum of punishment imposed and leave it to the disciplinary authorities."
"The Institute must explain the departure from its own guidelines and cannot simply rely upon some unfettered discretion claimed by its director in such matters. The Institute cannot claim any immunity from judicial review," the statement stated.
The decision to prohibit the students from registering for a semester was subsequently overturned by the high court, who substituted it with an order for the two students to "undertake community service for a period of two months and for two hours each day," which they have consented to perform at an assisted living facility close to their institute.