ADMU v. CAPULONG FACTS: The respondents, having been previously enrolled in the University, seek re-admission.

They have been found guilty of violating Rule No. 3 of the Ateneo Law school rules on discipline which prohibits participation in hazing activities. They participated in the initiation rites of Aquila Legis which resulted in the death of Leonardo Villa and severely injured Bienvenido Marquez. Petitioner Dean Del Castillo created a Joint Administration-Faculty Student Investigating Committee to investigate the circumstances surrounding the initiation rites. They were placed on preventive suspension. A disciplinary board was also created to hear charges against respondent students. Fr. Bernas, president of the University, imposed the penalty of dismissal on all respondents. Respondent student filed a motion for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus with prayer for TRO. The TRO was granted but the same expire on Arpil 7, 1991. Another specialized board was created to which the respondent students reacted. Petitioners then moved to strike out the motion but respondent judge ordered petitioner to reinstate respondent students. ISSUE: Whether or not there was a denial of due process against the respondent students. HELD: No. The students rights in the school proceedings have been meticulously respected by petitioners. Notices and letters clearly show that respondent students were given ample opportunity to adduce evidence in their behalf and to answer the charges leveled against them. Due process in disciplinary cases involving students do not entail proceedings and hearing identical to those prescribed for actions and proceedings in the courts of justice. Hearing as a ground for disciplining students finds its rason detre in the increasing frequency of injury, even death.