Patna: The Patna High Court has quashed the expulsion of a Class 9 student from Don Bosco Academy, holding that disciplinary action against a minor must comply with established rules, principles of natural justice and proportionality.
A single-judge bench of Justice Harish Kumar set aside the school’s expulsion order dated October 17, 2025, and directed the institution to allow the student to resume classes and participate in academic activities.
What Was the School’s Case?
The school had cited indiscipline as the reason for the student’s expulsion.
According to the school, the student had repeatedly bunked classes, disobeyed teachers and was involved in a physical altercation with another student. The institution also submitted that the student had received several warnings and counselling sessions, but his conduct had not improved.
The school relied on its regulations, which provided for expulsion in cases involving serious misconduct.
Court Questions Proportionality of Expulsion
The High Court acknowledged that a school principal has the authority to take disciplinary action against students. However, it noted that expulsion represents the most severe form of disciplinary punishment.
The Court observed that merely bunking classes was not specifically identified in the school’s rules as an offence warranting expulsion. It also said the alleged physical altercation would have to be assessed based on its nature, seriousness and surrounding circumstances.
The Court found that the expulsion order had been passed without adequate consideration of these factors.
Student Was Not Given Adequate Opportunity
The Court also noted that the student had not been provided an adequate opportunity to respond to the allegations against him.
The principles of natural justice require a student facing serious disciplinary consequences to be given a fair opportunity to present their side, the Court observed.
It further emphasised the importance of proportionality when disciplinary measures are imposed on minors.
Corrective Measures Preferred Where Reform Is Possible
The High Court said schools should consider corrective measures where there remains a possibility of reform.
Such measures may include warnings, counselling and monitoring of the student’s conduct before resorting to expulsion, particularly in cases involving minor students.
The Court’s observation places emphasis on discipline while also recognising the educational and corrective role of schools.
Private Schools Can Face Judicial Review
The judgment also addressed the legal status of private, unaided schools in such matters.
The High Court observed that private schools perform the public function of providing education. Consequently, their actions may come under judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution in appropriate cases, particularly where questions of fairness or legality arise.
The observation means that private educational institutions are not entirely outside the scope of constitutional judicial scrutiny when exercising functions connected with education.
Special Exam Ordered If Required
The Court also sought to ensure that the student’s academic progress was not adversely affected by the expulsion.
It directed that if the student had missed a mandatory examination because of the expulsion, the school must provide an opportunity to appear for a special or supplementary examination.
The direction is intended to prevent the disciplinary dispute from causing lasting academic consequences for the student
