M VENKATARAMANAPPA Vs. CHANCELLOR BANGALOUR UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ appeal is directed against the order dated 13-4-2007 in W. P. No. 13031/2006 (reported in 2007 (3) AIR Kar R 448) passed by the learned single Judge dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant.

(2.) IN the year 2002 the respondent-University awarded Ph. D. by duly admitting the appellant for convocation for his research on the subject "small Farmers in Rural Karnataka- A Sociological Study". The first respondent-Chancellor received complaints stating that the thesis submitted by the appellant was plagiriased. Similar complaints were also given to the fourth respondent-Vice-Chancellor. The first respondent-Chancellor by his communication dated 29-3-2003 directed the fourth respondent -Vice-Chancellor to enquire into the matter and to take appropriate action and to report compliance of the same within one month. Before the communication dated 29-3-2003 reached the Vice-Chancellor, the respondent -University referred the thesis submitted by the appellant to the Institute for social and Economic Changes and they submitted a report on 14-2-2003 and the relevant portion reads as under:

(3.) THEREAFTER the University has referred the matter to a Committee of three outside experts. The Committee submitted its report stating that the allegation of plagiarism as baseless. The academic council and the syndicate of the respondent-University accepted the report submitted by the Committee of three experts. Long thereafter the first respondent- Chancellor by exercising his powers under section 8 of the Karnataka State Universities act, 2000 (for short 'the Act') issued notification on 30-8-2006 appointing an enquiry committee to enquire into the allegation of plagiarism of Ph. D. thesis submitted by the appellant and the involvement of his guide, Professor B. C. Mylaraiah. The appellant being aggrieved by the impugned notification dated 30-6-2006 filed W. P. No. 13031/2006. The learned single Judge, under the impugned order, dismissed the writ petition and upheld the action of first respondent-Chancellor in initiating enquiry against the appellant. Hence, this writ appeal.