The Kerala High Court on Wednesday, November 11, questioned the Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit (SSUS) in Kalady over its insistence that suspended students submit an unconditional apology as a condition for revoking their suspension. The court observed that the students had already been suspended for 60 days and questioned whether the period of suspension wasn’t sufficient punishment, even assuming there had been misconduct.
Justice PV Kunhikrishnan was hearing a petition filed by 16 students challenging their suspension pending disciplinary proceedings over an incident during a protest on the university campus on August 13.
"I am not accepting what they have done, but they have suffered. They have been out for 60 days. Assume for argument that there is misconduct, isn't 60 days enough?" the judge said, as per LiveLaw.
During the hearing, the judge questioned the University's position that the students should apologise before their suspension could be withdrawn. The court observed that the students had already suffered the consequences of being kept away from the institution for two months, apart from losing the opportunity to appear for their semester examinations.
The judge clarified that the court was not endorsing the students' alleged conduct but said the University should consider the consequences they had faced.
The court also indicated that it would proceed with hearing the matter if the University did not reconsider its position. It posted the case for Friday, November 13, for further consideration.
The students approached the Kerala High Court seeking relief from the suspension and permission to write their examinations. They argued that the attendance shortage cited against them was a consequence of the University preventing them from entering the campus.
On October 30, a single judge of the High Court provisionally permitted the students to appear for their examinations, subject to the final outcome of their pending petition challenging the suspension.
The University challenged this order before a Division Bench. On November 3, the Division Bench, comprising Justices Anil K Narendran and Muralee Krishna S, set aside the single judge's interim direction. It held that the students had not established their eligibility to appear for the examinations under the applicable university regulations, including requirements relating to minimum attendance and internal assessment.
The students subsequently approached the Supreme Court challenging the Division Bench decision. However, on November 3, the Supreme Court declined to entertain their plea and asked the single judge of the Kerala High Court to hear and decide their challenge to the suspension expeditiously.
The Supreme Court also recorded the University's assurance that special examinations would be conducted if the students secured a favourable decision from the High Court on their suspension.
The dispute at SSUS began on July 22, when students affiliated with the Students Federation of India (SFI), the student organisation of the CPI(M), launched a protest with an 18-point charter of demands. These included concerns over campus infrastructure, academic administration, and student rights.
The protest escalated on August 13, when students of the Department of Theatre staged a street play titled Light Mariche (The Light Has Died) during the first meeting of the University's reconstituted Syndicate. The performance symbolically represented the funeral of non-functional stage lights and was intended to draw attention to the department's infrastructure problems.
The University, however, interpreted the performance as a mock funeral of Vice-Chancellor Ciza Thomas. Allegations also emerged that the Vice-Chancellor was physically manhandled and that students attempted to damage her vehicle as she left the campus after the meeting. The students have denied these allegations, maintaining that the performance was directed at the dysfunctional theatre lights and was not intended as a mock funeral of the Vice-Chancellor.
The Kalady police registered a suo motu case against 65 students on August 13. A second case was registered on August 17 following a complaint by the Vice-Chancellor. On September 1, the University suspended 16 students pending an enquiry into the incident.
The suspension prevented the students from attending classes and subsequently affected their eligibility to appear for the semester examinations scheduled to begin on November 4.
Meanwhile, at a Syndicate meeting on November 2, the University decided to allow the suspension of 12 of the 16 students to be conditionally withdrawn. The students were required to submit an unconditional apology and give an assurance that they would comply with the University's disciplinary regulations in the future. The suspension of the remaining four students was extended by another two months.
The students rejected the proposal, saying they would not apologise for participating in a democratic protest. They demanded that all 16 suspension orders be revoked without conditions.
The CPI(M) has supported the students' position, with party state secretary MV Govindan stating that the SFI activists would not tender an apology. Higher Education Minister Roji M John, meanwhile, maintained that the government and the University Syndicate were not opposed to allowing the students to write their examinations but insisted that they acknowledge their mistake and submit a written apology.
The latest observations by the High Court come amid the students' continuing demand for the withdrawal of their suspensions without conditions. The court is scheduled to consider the matter again on Friday, November 13.