K KRISHNAPPA Vs. REGISTRAR EVALUATION BANGALORE UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) the writ petition No. 11446/1991 is filed by the principal, visveswarapura college of law, Bangalore-first petitioner and the general secretary of Vokkaligara Sangha, V.V.Puram, K.R.Road, Bangalore-second petitioner. Since common questions arise for consideration in this writ petition and the connected writ petitions they are taken up together for consideration and decision.

(2.) a few facts which are necessary for disposal of these cases as gathered from the pleadings in W.P. No. 11446/1991 are: visweswarapura college of law is run by vokkaligara sangha. The strength in the said college is more than 1500 students studying the ll.b course of three years. This apart, the college has five years teaching course also in law. The first petitioner in W.P. No. 11446/1991 was appointed as the chief superintendent of the examination centre of V.V.Puram law college for conducting the exams of all the three years ll.b. course during april, 1991. The i year ll.b. examination commenced at the said college from 11-4-1991 and ended on 19-4-1991. The ii year ll.b. examination was held on 20-4-1991 and onwards. The Bangalore university to see that the examinations are conducted in a disciplined manner and that no unfair practice is adopted by the examinees issued guidelines as per annexure-a. On 12-4-1991 while i year ll.b. examination was going on in the college, the squad members visited the college at about 3.00 p.m. they having noticed malpractice in the centre took away the main sheets of the diary of the room superintendents by writing on them 'rampant copying' and forcing the room superintendents to sign the same and also the invigilators signed the blank papers. Thereafter the squad members entered the chamber of the chief superintendent and asked him to sign the white papers in which they had written 'rampant copying' in the examination halls. The chief superintendent asked the squad leader to follow the procedure as prescribed by the Bangalore university in annexure-a. He refused to sign as the squad members had not brought to his notice any individual case of malpractice with incriminating material. It is further stated that inspite of the strict vigilance and periodical rounds by the chief superintendent of examination and other staff it could not be said that there was no copying at all. The chief superintendent contends that immediately he telephoned to the first respondent-registrar (evaluation), Bangalore university about the illegal report of the squad and narrated the incident. He also claims to have sent a detailed report in writing as per Annexure-C on 12-4-1991. The petitioners further contend that the squad members gave surprise visit on 22-4-1991 and also on 24-4-1991 when the ii year ll.b. examination was being conducted at about 3-45 p.m. during the course of their inspection and physical search the squad members found some printed material in possession of the students, which they handed over to the chief superintendent. Again on 29-4-1991 when iii year ll.b. examination was going on the squad members found 5 cases of copying. In this regard a report was made as per Annexure-D . The petitioners further contend that without applying mind to the report of the first petitioner dated 12-4-1991 as per Annexure-C the registrar (evaluation) has passed the impugned order-annexure-e, dated 3-5-1991 stating that the squad members noticed 'rampant copying' on 12-4-1991 and 24-4-1991 and that they collected huge quantity of notes, chits, guide books etc. And that the principal had not co-operated with the squad and refused to sign the report prepared by the squad. The university had received number of letters and telegrams alleging that the principal of the college had collected money from the candidates taking examination to arrange for copying. The letter dated 12-4-1991 was received in the university office on 19-4-1991. In this view of the matter the examinations conducted for i and ii year ll.b. examinations at the said college on 12-4-1991, 15-4-1991, 16-4-1991, 18-4-1991, 19-4-1991, 20-4-1991, 22-4-1991, 23-4-1991 and 24-4-1991 were cancelled. It was also stated that there would be no re-examination in view of the alleged rampant mass copying found at the centre, the impugned order-annexure-e is called in question stating it to be highly arbitrary, illegal, mechanical and contrary to Rule of law. It is contended that the respondent is not conferred with the power of cancelling the examinations of all the students when there was no material on record to support such cancellation. Even if there was any malpractice found it was only in case of few students and respondent could not have cancelled the examinations of the students who had honestly written the examinations. It is also contended that though the squad had visited only on 12-4-1991, 22-4-1991 and 24-4-1991 the respondent could not have cancelled the five examinations of the i year and four examinations of the ii year ll.b. course. Thus, the impugned order being arbitrary and opposed to Rule of law and natural Justice according to the petitioners, is liable to be quashed and they have sought for a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to announce the results of the i and ii year ll.b. examinations taken at the said college conducted during april, 1991.

(3.) the writ petition nos. 11732 to 11776 of 1991 and 11871 of 1991 are filed by the students of the visveswarapuram college of law. In these writ petitions also the impugned order-annexure-e is questioned on the ground that it is arbitrary, opposed to law and one passed in violation of principles of natural justice. As such they have sought for quashing it as stated above. They have further sought for a direction to the respondents to evaluate their answer scripts and announce the results of the examination taken by them during april, 1991.