Allahabad High Court
MD. TASNEEM REZAversusALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- SIDDHARTH NANDAN
Holding
The court held that the disciplinary proceedings must be concluded and the Proctor must pass a fresh, reasoned order on clearance, as clearance cannot be denied pending unresolved show‑cause proceedings.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Tasneem Reza, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) to decide his representation and allow him to appear for Ph.D. admission in Mechanical Engineering for the 2025-26 session. The university required clearance from the Office of the Proctor, but the petitioner had been served with two show‑cause notices for alleged violent conduct, and the disciplinary proceedings were not concluded. The petitioner argued that clearance could not be granted until the show‑cause proceedings were completed in accordance with natural justice. The court observed that the pending disciplinary proceedings had not been brought to a logical end and therefore could not serve as a basis for denying clearance. It directed that the disciplinary matters be concluded and the Proctor issue a fresh, reasoned order on clearance within one month. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of with directions for the university to act expeditiously.
Issues considered
- Whether the University can deny clearance from the Office of the Proctor for Ph.D. admission while disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner are pending.
- Whether the principles of natural justice require the completion of show‑cause proceedings before the Proctor can grant or deny clearance.
Legislation cited
- Aligarh Muslim University Statutes — s. 35(3)
- AMU Students' Conduct and Discipline Rules, 1985 — s. Part‑II, Rule‑4(i), Part‑II, Rule‑4(iii), Part‑II, Rule‑4(iv), Part‑II, Rule‑4(xxiii)
Subjects
- mandamus
- university admission
- Ph.D. clearance
- Proctor
- disciplinary proceedings
- natural justice
- show‑cause notice
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 19272 of 2026
Md. Tasneem Reza
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
Aligarh Muslim University And Another
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Najam Uz Zaman Khan
Counsel for Respondent(s) : Shashank Shekhar Singh
Court No. - 38
HON'BLE SIDDHARTH NANDAN, J.
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to implead the
Proctor of Aligarh Muslim University as respondent No. 3. He is
permitted to do so during the course of the day.
2. This writ petition has been filed with the prayer for the issuance of a
mandamus commanding respondents No. 1 and 2 to decide the
representation of the petitioner dated 09.05.2026 and directing the
respondents to allow the petitioner to appear in the counselling for
submission of documents for admission to the Ph.D. in Mechanical
Engineering for the session 2025-26.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a supplementary affidavit,
which is taken on record. He has placed an office memo dated 21.11.2024
to contend that, in similar circumstances, an action was proposed under
Section 35(3) of the University Statute, and it was only thereafter, when
the final order was passed, that the candidature for the P.G. Diploma in
Mass Communication was rejected. However, in the present case, on
instructions, counsel for the respondent-University has submitted that,
under the Rules in the 'Guide to Admission' of Aligarh Muslim
University, which have been approved and ratified by the competent
bodies of the University, including the Academic Council, certain
'Important Information and Rules' were issued. In points No. 48, 49, and
57, it has been mentioned that all admissions shall be provisional and
subject to clearance from the Office of the Proctor.
WRIC No. 19272 of 2026
2
4. He has also placed on record that Sri Shashank Shekhar Singh,
Advocate for the respondent-University, along with his instructions, has
submitted a letter dated 09.05.2026, sent by the Proctor of Aligarh
Muslim University, wherein it has been observed that, earlier on
05.07.2023, a show-cause notice was issued to the petitioner for being
involved, along with two other students, in a brutal physical assault.
Similarly, he was also issued a show-cause notice on 27.02.2026 for
leading a violent and unruly mob of students that attempted to forcibly
break open the main entrance gate of the Office of the Proctor, raised
derogatory and threatening slogans against university functionaries,
disrupted the official functioning of the Office of the Proctor, and created
an atmosphere of terror. He has further submitted that the show cause was
issued for violation of Part-II, Rule-4 clauses (i),(iii),(iv), and (xxiii) of
the AMU Students' Conduct and Discipline Rules, 1985.
5. However, this Court finds that neither the proceedings which may have
been initiated in pursuance of the show-cause notice dated 05.07.2023 nor
those initiated pursuant to the show-cause notice dated 27.02.2026 were
brought to their logical end.
6. In view of the above, counsel for the petitioner submits that clearance
from the Office of the Proctor could have only been accorded if the
proceedings pursuant to the show-cause notices dated 05.07.2023 and
27.02.2026 had been brought to their logical end, in adherence to the
procedure prescribed and to the principles of natural justice.
7. Considering the above, Sri Shashank Shekhar Singh, Advocate for the
respondent-University, submits that the said proceedings shall be brought
to their logical end, and a fresh order regarding the requirement of
clearance from the Office of the Proctor shall be passed.
8. In light of the above, and with the consent of the parties, the matter is
relegated to the newly impleaded respondent No. 3, i.e., the Proctor of
A.M.U., Aligarh, since the show-cause notice dated 27.02.2026 for
violation of Part II, Rule 4 of the AMU Students' Conduct and Discipline
Rules, 1985, has been stated to have been issued by him. He shall take an
appropriate decision after considering the reply dated 01.03.2026, and if
WRIC No. 19272 of 2026
3
required, a further opportunity may also be given to the petitioner. Once a
final order is passed, he shall pass a fresh order giving appropriate reasons
on the subject of clearance for the purpose of admission to the Ph.D. in
Mechanical Engineering for the session 2025-26.
9. The aforesaid exercise shall be completed expeditiously, preferably
within a period of one month from the date of service of a copy of this
order.
10. With the aforesaid directions/observations, the writ petition stands
disposed of.
(Siddharth Nandan,J.)
May 18, 2026
piyush
Digitally signed by :-
PIYUSH KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…