Supreme Court upholds suspension of PhD scholar from TISS, but allows reinstatement
The Supreme Court on Friday upheld the suspension of PhD scholar Ramadas Prini Sivanandan from the Tata Institute of Social Sciences for 'repetitive misconduct' and alleged anti-national activities, Live Law reported.
However, the court reduced Ramadas' two-year suspension to the time that he had already served until Friday and ordered his reinstatement, The Hindu reported.
The bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Manmohan noted that Ramadas should be given the opportunity to finish his doctoral studies.
Ramadas welcomed the Supreme Court's decision in a Facebook post. He said that the denial of education to a student was not only a personal matter, but one that impacts the 'fundamental rights of countless students and the question of campus democracy in our higher education system'.
'Though this period has been a tough fight, taking away a significant amount of time from my education and daily life, I am glad that I could also be a small part of the resistance,' he said.
On April 18, 2024, the institute had suspended him from the School of Developmental Studies in its Mumbai campus for two years.
A day after Ramadas was suspended, the Progressive Students' Forum had claimed that the action was taken because he had participated in protests against the Bharatiya Janata Party government.
The students' forum claimed that Ramadas, who is also a student leader, had received a show cause notice from the registrar of the institute in March 2024, objecting to his activism, specifically his participation in the Parliament March in Delhi in January 2024 and his post on social media encouraging students to watch the documentary Ram Ke Naam as an 'anti-national act'.
Ram Ke Naam is a National Film Award-winning 1992 documentary by filmmaker Anand Patwardhan about the campaign by Hindutva groups to build a Ram temple at the site of the erstwhile Babri mosque in Ayodhya.
On its part, the Tata Institute of Social Sciences said that Ramadas was suspended for two years due to 'repetitive misconduct over a period of time'.
'Throughout his tenure, Ramadas KS exhibited a shift in focus towards activities unrelated to his academic pursuits, engaging in events, protests, and other activities influenced by personal political agendas,' the institute had said on April 20, 2024. 'Despite repeated verbal and written advisories from the TISS Administration to prioritise academic commitments, Ramadas KS failed to comply.'
In May 2024, Ramadas moved the Bombay High Court challenging his suspension. The plea was rejected in March, prompting him to approach the Supreme Court.
In his petition, he claimed that the order was imposed without properly considering his explanations.
The suspension violated his constitutional rights, including the right to freedom of speech and association, the petition said. It added that the Tata Institute of Social Sciences had fabricated a narrative to vilify him to punish him for his political activities and views.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
44 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Despite SC nod, HCs not keen on appointing retired judges to tackle backlog
New Delhi, Despite the Supreme Court clearing the idea nearly five months ago, the high courts seem not to be keen on appointing ad-hoc judges to tackle pending criminal cases, details available with the government showed. According to people aware of the procedure to appoint Supreme Court and high court judges, none of the high court collegiums have so far recommended names of retired judges to be appointed as ad-hoc judges. There are 25 high courts in the country. Till June 11, no high court collegiums sent any such proposal to the Union Law Ministry. Considering a backlog of over 18 lakh criminal cases, the Supreme Court on January 30 allowed the high courts to appoint ad-hoc judges, not exceeding 10 per cent of the court's total sanctioned strength. Article 224A of the Constitution allows the appointment of retired judges as ad-hoc judges in high courts to help deal with pendency. According to the laid down procedure, the respective high court collegiums send recommendations or names of candidates to be appointed as HC judges to the Department of Justice in the law ministry. The department then adds inputs and details of the candidates before forwarding the same to the Supreme Court Collegium. The SC Collegium then takes a final call and recommends to the government to appoint the selected persons as judges. The president signs the 'warrant of appointment' of the newly-appointed judge. The procedure to appoint ad-hoc judges will be the same except that the president will not sign the warrant of appointment. But the assent of the president will be sought for appointing ad-hoc judges. Except in one case, there is no precedence of appointing retired judges as ad-hoc HC judges, officials had earlier pointed out. In a judgement dated April 20, 2021, on the appointment of ad-hoc judges in the high courts, the top court imposed certain conditions. However, later a special Supreme Court bench comprising then Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna, Justices B R Gavai and Surya Kant relaxed certain conditions and kept some in abeyance. The verdict, which was authored by former chief justice S A Bobde, directed retired high court judges to be appointed as ad-hoc ones for a period of two to three years to clear the backlog. While one condition said that ad-hoc judges cannot be appointed if a high court was working with 80 per cent of its sanctioned strength, the other said ad-hoc judges could sit separately on benches to deal with cases. Relaxing the conditions, the court said the requirement that vacancies should not be more than 20 per cent of the sanctioned strength for the time being shall be kept in abeyance. The bench also said each high court should keep the appointment to two to five ad-hoc judges and not exceed 10 per cent of the total sanctioned strength. "The ad-hoc judges will sit in a bench presided over by a sitting judge of the high court and decide pending criminal appeals," the apex court's order said. The rarely used Article 224A of the Constitution deals with the appointment of ad-hoc judges in high courts. "The chief justice of a high court for any state may at any time, with the previous consent of the president, request any person who has held the office of a judge of that court or of any other high court to sit and act as a judge of the high court for that state," it says.
India Today
5 hours ago
- India Today
NEET UG 2025: 12.37 lakh qualify, no perfect 720 scores this year
The NEET-UG 2025 results have been declared, revealing a significant shift in trends—most notably, the absence of any perfect scores and a lower overall top score compared to previous Kumar from Rajasthan emerged as the sole topper, securing a percentile of 99.9999547. He was closely followed by Madhya Pradesh's Utkarsh Awadhiya, who scored a percentile of 99.9999095. TThe top score this year dropped to 686, with no candidate securing a full In contrast, last year saw 17 students achieve a perfect 720, although this figure was later revised to 61 after a Supreme Court intervention over grace marks and answer key discrepancies. This time, the NTA has not released individual scores for the top 50 candidates, breaking from earlier MARKS DROP AS TOP SCORE FAILSWith the top scores dipping, the cut-off marks have followed suit. For the general category, the qualifying range was between 686 and 144. This is a drop from last year's range of 720–162, and 720–137 in 2023.A total of 73 candidates scored within the 651–686 marks range this year, according to the official results. The sharp decline in top scores may be reflective of the stricter monitoring and tighter evaluation process that was in place for the 2025 12 LAKH CANDIDATES QUALIFYadvertisementOut of 22.09 lakh students who appeared for NEET UG this year, 12.37 lakh have cleared the examination—indicating a qualifying rate of over 56%. The participation numbers dipped slightly from last year's 23.33 candidates continued to dominate the results, making up over half of all test-takers and accounting for nearly 58% (7.22 lakh) of those who BREAKUPUttar Pradesh led the tally with the highest number of qualified candidates (1,70,684), followed by Maharashtra (1,25,727), Rajasthan (1,19,865), Karnataka (83,582), and Bihar (80,954). Amongst the top 20 rankers, Rajasthan and Delhi each produced four candidates.-----After a controversy surrounding a paper leak in 2024, the NEET UG 2025 exam was conducted under heightened security and surveillance. The Ministry of Education set up a committee last year to recommend improved protocols, and both state and central agencies worked to ensure smooth and fair conduct of the exam in May this the medical entrance test continues to be a high-stakes gateway for lakhs of aspirants, this year's results underscore a renewed focus on exam integrity and Watch
The Hindu
5 hours ago
- The Hindu
Protesting teachers in Bengal go on hunger strike ‘till government meets demands'
Protesting teachers in West Bengal, whose appointments were cancelled after the Supreme Court order, have gone on a hunger strike, demanding that the government pause fresh recruitments until their review petition yields a result. Ten protesting teachers — Mita Sarkar, Chinmoy Mondal, Koushik Sarkar, Balaram Biswas, Sukumar Soren, Bikash Roy, Manik Majumder, Kishore Kumar Roy, Anirban Saha, and Achinta Das — started 'fasting unto death' from 1 am on June 13. As of going to press, they would have completed nearly 48 hours of their hunger strike. 'We lost our livelihoods for no fault of ours, but because of the government's corruption. So we have been forced to take this extreme step. We will not end our hunger strike till our demands are met, or till our bodies give in,' fasting teacher Mr Mondal said. This development follows months of protests after a Supreme Court order on April 3 invalidated nearly 26,000 teaching and non-teaching job appointments from the recruitment panel published by the West Bengal School Service Commission (SSC) in 2016, citing a 'vitiated and tainted' hiring process. Following a consequent order by the Supreme Court, the West Bengal government published the rules and notification for fresh recruitments to fill 44,203 vacancies for the position of assistant teachers. Meanwhile, the State and the SSC have also filed review petitions at the Supreme Court. 'The process of the review petition [before the Supreme Court] and fresh appointments will continue simultaneously,' Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee had said on May 27 this year. However, 'sacked and untainted' teachers have raised questions on why the application deadline for fresh recruitments is set before the Supreme Court can take a decision on the review petition. 'Our primary demand behind the hunger strike is for the government to postpone or put on hold fresh recruitments till the Supreme Court pronounces a judgement on the review petition. As of now, the deadline to apply for fresh recruitment closes before the Supreme Court is due to reopen after summer recess on July 14. We believe the government is not interested in pursuing the review petition earnestly,' Mehebub Mondal, a protesting teacher and leading voice of the Jogyo Shikkhok Shikkhika Adhikar Mancha (JSSAM), told The Hindu. He explained that the review petition is one of the last remaining hopes for 'untainted' teachers to have their job appointments reinstated without re-examination. 'We have proved our worth once and have worked diligently as teachers for seven years. We are innocent victims of the government's corruption. The SSC should publish a certified list of 'untainted candidates' and a fresh merit list for 2016 after re-evaluating our OMR sheets. That will help us retain our jobs, and the worthy waitlisted candidates can also find their deserved position in the merit list,' Mr Mondal said. He added that if the sacked teachers must reappear for fresh recruitments, they demand to be recruited through a separate notification and selection process, meant only for the affected teachers of the cancelled 2016 panel. Mr Mondal also claimed that the SSC chairperson, during his meeting with JSSAM representatives on June 12, did not accept any of the demands put forth by the protesting teachers.
