The Bombay High Court has dismissed a petition filed by Ramadas K. S., a Dalit PhD student at the Tata Institute of Social Science (TISS), who challenged his suspension from the institute. The court said the suspension order was legal and found no reason to interfere.

Ramadas K S was suspended by TISS in April 2024 for two years due to alleged misconduct and participation in "anti-national activities." The suspension followed his involvement in a protest march in New Delhi against the central government's "anti-student policies." He was also accused of urging people to watch the National Award-winning documentary Ram Ke Naam during the Ayodhya Ram temple consecration ceremony.

The institute argued that Ramadas's actions created the impression that his political views were the views of TISS itself. Since he participated in the protest under the banner of a TISS student organisation, the court said this "brought disrepute to the institute in its view."

A division bench of Justices A S Chandurkar and M M Sathaye ruled, "The order suspending the petitioner (Ramadas) does not suffer from any illegality or perversity. We find that this is not a fit case to interfere. There is no merit in the petition, and the same is dismissed."

The court added, "Ramadas can have any political view of his choice, but so does the institute. The petitioner has full freedom of expressing his political view, but to do so under the banner of the respondent institute is what is objected to by the institute."

The legal battle

Ramadas argued that his suspension was "unlawful, arbitrary, and unfair." He also said his scholarship was stopped because of the suspension, making it difficult for him to survive.

TISS opposed his plea, stating that Ramadas had an "alternate remedy" — he could appeal to a committee within the institute. However, Ramadas countered this, saying he wouldn’t get an impartial hearing from the institute’s committee.

In an affidavit, TISS Registrar Narendra Mishra stated that according to the 2016-2017 handbook for MPhil and PhD scholars, the appellate authority is the institute’s Vice Chancellor. He explained that due to rising incidents of student misconduct, a high-level committee was formed on March 14, 2024, to handle disciplinary matters. This committee was approved by the Administration Co-ordination Committee, led by the Vice Chancellor. Mishra added that the student union was not included in this committee because student leaders were part of a major protest on January 22, 2024.

The affidavit further said, "In view of increasing issues of serious misconduct by the students, a high-level common committee consisting of officials holding senior posts within the institute was constituted to deal with all issues of misconduct and disciplinary action of all the students of TISS."

TISS argued that Ramadas had been informed of his right to appeal but didn’t take the opportunity, calling his petition an "abuse of the process of law."

Senior advocate Mihir Desai and advocate Lara Jesani, representing Ramadas, denied that an appeal option existed. They said the latest 2023-2024 student handbook doesn’t mention any such option. "The institute is misleading the high court by referring to an old handbook that was neither provided to students nor available online," Ramadas stated.

He also claimed that the inquiry was biased, and he wasn’t given a chance for a personal hearing. According to his petition, "Since the time Mr. Ramadas joined the institute, he has been a hard-working and dedicated student who has been actively engaged in academics and has been active in the student community to raise issues faced by the students as well as human rights concerns in the country. Since he is a deeply passionate and highly aware citizen of the country, he therefore has been positively engaged in student politics."

The court acknowledged that Ramadas’s scholarship was stopped, causing him financial hardship. However, the bench decided not to give interim relief and said the case would proceed to a hearing on June 18, focusing on whether an alternate remedy existed.

The court maintained that Ramadas’s political views weren’t the issue—the problem was presenting them under the institute’s name. It ruled that the institute has the right to protect its reputation and prevent students from associating it with political protests.

For now, Ramadas remains suspended, and his scholarship remains halted. The court’s decision has sparked debate about student rights, freedom of expression, and institutional authority. The June 18 hearing will decide whether Ramadas still has a chance to challenge his suspension through the institute’s internal appeals process.

This case raises important questions about how far a student’s freedom of expression can go—especially when their actions are tied to the institution they represent.

You might also be interested in: Bihar Mayor faces backlash for proposing 2-hour Holi break for Friday prayers