S.C.Mathur, J. - (1.) the petitioner who was doing internship in King George Medical College, Lucknow, has approached this Court seeking a writ of certiorari to quash the order dated 12-6-199l, Annexure-1, and the notice dated 12-9-1991 Annexure-4. The order dated 12-6-1991 and the notice dated 12-9-1991 both have been issued by the Principal of College.
(2.) The petitioner was doing internship in the aforesaid college and was staying in Boom No. 57 of S.P. Hall. On 23-2-1991 an incident admittedly took place at about 10 p. m. in in his room. In this moi dent there appears to have been a fight between Dr Anil Kumar Rathi, another student of the College and an outsider. The petitioner's ease is that ho has slight acquaintance with that outsider and on his request he had allowed him to keep his luggage for the day and in the evening ha was to take away the luggage. Prior to the occurrence there was a party which was attended by the petitioner, Dr Rat hi and the outsider. The petitioner asserts that at the party itself there was some altercation between the outsider and Dr. Rathi and when the outsider came to collect his luggage from his room Dr. Rathi along with certain other inmates of the hostel came to settle scores with the said outside. Report of this incident reached the Provost of the Hostel Dr. N.C. Misra, He visit the Hostel and thereafter submitted report to the Principal on 24-4-1991. In this report Dr. Misra has stated. "After Laving gone into all the facts of the incident on the night of Saturday 23rd February, in S.P. Hall and the proceeding events and having talked with all the persons involved. The following is the sequence of events which could be made out." Thereafter be records the sequence of events. In the sixth event of sequence he has stated. "Dr. Vikas Jain was also in drunken state as reported by hostel chowikidar and some residents. He ran away from the has when Dr. N. C. Misra reached around 11.30 p. m. on 23rd February ibdi'. Thereafter Dr. Misra makes his recommendations to the Principal regarding the action to be taken against the petitioner and Dr. Rathi. The fir Bt recommendation is that "the petitioner has been instructed to leave the hall". In Paragraph-3 of the recommendations it is stated that "Drunken disorder in behaviour is very strongly condemned and a warning issued that any such behaviour will on severely dealt." In Paragraph-4 it is stated. "Violating the Principals order that no guests are allowed to stay over night in the hail is reiterated and a4 body so found will be summarily expelled from the hail ", The Principal approved the step taken by Dr. Misra auu the recommendation made by him and pas-ed an order o 12-6-1991. The order so far as it relates to the petitioner reads as follows : "Expelled from the S.P. Hall with immediate effect. They ere also warned not to repeat such undesirable activities in future otherwise they will be dealt severely. An entry to this effect have been made in their character Rolls "
(3.) Against the above punishment tho petitioner preferred representation on 26-6-1991 which was forwarded by Dr. Misra to the Principal with the following observation "Dr. Vikas Jain was not present, when I have reached the S.P. Hall, Dr. Rathi has damaged his motor cycle and Cooler. I was told that Dr. Jain ran away after seeing the temper of Dr. Ratbi. I have lined Dr. Rathi and I have turned out Dr Jain although ho did not involve in the mischief inside the hail. He needs consideration for the character roll entry." Thus Dr. Misra did not recommend re-admission of the petitioner to the Hall although he recommended that the character roll entry may be expunged. The Principal did not agree wit h the recommendation of Dr. Misra and issued under dated 12 9-1991, Annexure-4 in which ha deprecated the tendency of Provosts and Heads of Department to alter their previous recommendations.;