Statement of claim for recognition of the order of expulsion as illegal
The interdistrict Civil Court of Astana
010000, Astana, Heydar Aliyev Street, 6.
Plaintiff: Stkarabekkyzy
IIN ....
Representative by power of attorney:
Legal office" law and law"
Bin 201240021767.
Republic of Kazakhstan, 050002, Almaty,
Almaly district, abylai Khana Ave., house 79/71, office 304.
info@zakonpravo.kz www.zakonpravo.kz
Tel.: +7 708 971 78 58 / 8 727 971 78 58.
Defendant:"Astana Medical University"
Non-profit Joint Stock Company
Bin ...
Astana, Saryarka district, Beibitshilik STR., building 49A.
+7 700 ...
CLAIM
on recognition of the order of expulsion as illegal
Between stkarabekovna (hereinafter referred to as the plaintiff) and Nao "Astana Medical University" (hereinafter referred to as the Defendant) dated March 31, 2022 no. 7.4-21-1602 a model agreement on the provision of Educational Services has been concluded. In accordance with this agreement, the defendant undertakes to provide the plaintiff with higher education services, organize the educational process and, in case of complete completion of the training program, issue a document on relevant education.
On April 15, 2025, by order of the defendant, that is, the chairman of the management board of the University – Rector No. 489-s/S (hereinafter referred to as the order), a 4th year student of the medical school Stkarabekovna, that is, the plaintiff, was expelled from the University.
This order was adopted on the basis of the protocol of the Disciplinary Council No. 6 dated April 10, 2025.
On March 31, 2025, during the exam in Immunology, the plaintiff was detained for using a crib.
On April 10, 2025, a meeting of the defendant's disciplinary council was held and Protocol No. 6 was drawn up. The disciplinary council assessed the actions of the plaintiff as a violation of the requirements of the internal regulatory documents of the University, in particular subparagraphs 20) and 24) of Paragraph 8 of the Code of ethics of the University, as well as:
20) for the commission of offenses and crimes related to corruption, including the transfer or receipt of a bribe (the provision of gifts, remuneration in any form, as well as the provision of intermediary services for the transfer of a bribe;
24) for the use of mobile communications, sheets, headphones or other means of communication during current, intermediate and final control, for violation of control rules.
That is, in the conclusion of the disciplinary council, it was concluded that the plaintiff not only used a mobile phone during the exam, but also committed a corruption offense, and it was proposed to expel the plaintiff from the University.
However, I believe that this order was adopted illegally, unjustifiably and in violation of the rights and legitimate interests of the plaintiff. The reasons for this are the following:
Firstly, the plaintiff did not give any bribes to the teachers, and although he was accused of committing a corruption offense, no evidence was presented as to exactly what material values or funds were transferred. On the part of the plaintiff, there was no fact of transferring funds, gifts or other material assets to the defendant's employees.
Secondly, according to the issued Protocol No. 6 and the official record of the defendant, the plaintiff determined that the university violated the principles of the Code of academic integrity. In accordance with the code of academic integrity of the University, the procedure for registration and consideration of cases of violation of academic integrity is clearly regulated. In particular, if a violation is detected during the examination or midterm control, an appropriate act must be drawn up and the issue considered in accordance with the established procedures. However, data on full compliance with these procedures were not provided to the student.
Thirdly, the principle of proportionality must be observed when imposing disciplinary penalties. according to the practice of the defendant's disciplinary board from January to April 2025, more than 80 students who used cribs were sent to retrain the discipline during the summer semester and were not expelled. Despite this, the most severe punishment was imposed against the plaintiff – expulsion.
Fourth, in accordance with paragraph 10 of the Code of ethics of the University, the responsibility of students is provided. This paragraph specifies that students may be brought to disciplinary responsibility for non-fulfillment and improper performance of curricula, duties stipulated by the Charter of the University, as well as for violation of this code, the Code of academic integrity, contractual obligations, rules for living in a hostel, and disciplinary penalties may be applied to them.
However, the specified norm does not provide for the application of the most severe disciplinary punishment to the student in the form of direct expulsion. This, in turn, indicates that the type of punishment imposed on the part of the defendant has gone beyond the limits of responsibility clearly enshrined in internal regulations, and the decision taken is excessively strict.
In accordance with Article 43 of the law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "on education", educational organizations are obliged to comply with the rights of students and ensure the legality of the educational process.
In addition, the issue of expulsion of students is regulated by paragraph 41 of the standard rules of activity of organizations of Higher and (or) postgraduate education, approved by the order of the minister of Science and higher education of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated October 30, 2018 No. 595. In accordance with this paragraph, a student may be expelled only on clearly stated grounds, namely academic failure, violation of the principles of academic integrity, violation of internal regulations, violation of the terms of the contract or only voluntarily.
In this regard, the expulsion on the grounds that the plaintiff "committed a corruption offense" is not provided for in the mentioned paragraph 41, and in the case of failure to prove such a serious charge, the legality of the expulsion order is questionable.
In accordance with subparagraph 1 of Paragraph 1 of Article 41 of the law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "on education", the Charter of the educational organization, in addition to the requirements provided for by the civil legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan, must contain the grounds and procedure for expulsion of students, pupils.
However, paragraph 117 of the defendant's Charter does not provide for a clear norm that the student will definitely be expelled in case of violation of the Code of ethics, that is, the use of a mobile phone during the exam or suspicion of giving a bribe.
In order to fully, comprehensively and objectively clarify these circumstances, a legal request was sent to the defendant in accordance with paragraph 3 of Article 76 of the law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "on advocacy and legal assistance". In this legal request, it is requested to provide a full copy of the materials of the disciplinary case against the plaintiff, as well as copies of all the evidence that the disciplinary council took as a basis when making a decision, including an audio recording (if any) provided by the University.
However, the defendant did not provide any concrete and sufficient evidence confirming the conclusion that the plaintiff committed a corruption offense. In particular, the plaintiff did not provide video, audio recordings, explanations of witnesses or other objective evidence confirming the actions of the plaintiff to transfer funds, present a gift, transfer material values or give a bribe.
In addition, the plaintiff sent a pre-trial protest on the revision of the defendant's order and its cancellation. In his response to this protest on May 06, 2026, he stated that there are no legal grounds for canceling the order, and that the defendant was not charged with any corruption offenses against the plaintiff, since such powers fall within the competence of authorized state bodies for combating corruption.
However, this position directly contradicts the content of the protocol of the Disciplinary Council No. 6 of April 10, 2025, that is, the grounds for the order. Because this protocol gives a legal assessment of the actions of the plaintiff "committing corruption offenses and crimes, including giving or receiving a bribe", and the order is adopted on the basis of the protocol. Thus, the defendant, on the one hand, indicates in the protocol of the disciplinary council that the plaintiff was accused of committing acts of a corruption nature, and on the other hand, in his official response to the pre-trial protest, declares that there was no such charge.
This, in turn, indicates that the legal position of the defendant is unstable, the circumstances were not objectively and comprehensively investigated in the course of disciplinary proceedings, and the decision made was also not based on sufficient evidence. In addition, although the most severe disciplinary punishment was applied against the plaintiff – expulsion, the defendant did not justify its necessity and proportionality at the proper level.
Thus, we believe that the defendant's order does not comply with the principles of legality, fairness, objectivity and proportionality, violates the plaintiff's right to education and legitimate interests, and in this regard is declared illegal and subject to cancellation.
Based on the above, guided by Article 8 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan and Article 47 of the law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "on education,
From the court:
* Illegal recognition of the order of the chairman of the board – Rector of the NAO" Astana Medical University " A. Turmukhametova dated April 15, 2025 No. 489-s / S;
* Oblige to re-enroll stkarabekovna in the number of students of NAO "Astana Medical University;
* Collection of Representative expenses in the amount of 600,000 (six hundred thousand) tenge paid in connection with the provision of legal assistance to the representative of Stkarabekovna from Nao" Astana Medical University";
· We ask the NJSC" Astana Medical University " to collect expenses in the amount of 4,325 (four thousand three hundred and twenty-five) tenge paid to the state fee for Stkarabekovna.
With respect,
Attention!
Law and Law Law Law draws your attention to the fact that this document is basic and does not always meet the requirements of a particular situation. Our lawyers are ready to assist you in legal advice, drawing up any legal document suitable for your situation.
For more information, please contact a Lawyer / Attorney by phone: +7 (708) 971-78-58; +7 (700) 978 5755, +7 (700) 978 5085.
Attorney at Law Almaty Lawyer Legal Services Legal Advice Civil Criminal Administrative Cases Disputes Protection Arbitration Law Firm Kazakhstan Law Office Court Cases
