H S SRIRAMAKRISHNA Vs. BANGALORE UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition coming up for preliminary hearing in 'B' Group after notice to respondents, is taken up for final hearing by consent 01 counsen for parties.

(2.) The petitioner war, a student studying in Acharya Patashala Evening College, Bangalore. The petitioner appeared for I Year B.A., Examination held in the month of April, 1977. He was successful in the said Examination, in all subjects, except English. He joined II Year B.A., course and took the Examination in six papers in April, 1978. In the Examination held for that cqurse. he passed in all subjeicts except in English in the 11-year degree course, as averred by him. He passed, II year B.A., in English in the supplementary Examinaltion held in September, 1978 and in November of the same year, the results were declared, by which he completed all the Examinations preocribed for II year B.A., course. The petitioner has further averred that he has paid the requisite, Examination fee for taking his III year B. A. Examination which was expected to be held at the time of filing of the writ petition in the month of April, 1979, It is staged by the petitioner that on 26-12-1978 he was served with a memo, from the Convenor, Malpractices Committee and Deputy Registrar of University of Bangalore, the relevant portion of which reads as follows: You are requested to send your explanation, if any to this office within five days from the date of this memo and also intimate, whether you would like to appear in person, before the Malpractices Enquiry Committee or not, failing which it will be presumed that you have nothing to offer against your defence and Action will be taken as per rules. The Malpractices Enquiry Committee, will meet at 10.00 A.M. on 9-1-1979 at the office of Controller of Examinationa (City Office) Mathematics Block, Central College, Bangalore-560 001. lr. response to the said memo, the petitioner appeared before the Malpractices Committee and pleaded total ignorance of his complicity in the act of copying by one Sridharamurthy in respect of whom the examiner had made certain observations to the Malpractices Committee However, after issuing a, show cause notice, the petitioner was punished as evidenced by Ext,-J to the petition by notification issued on 13th February 1979, pursuant to 'the resolution, of the Syndicate of the University passed at its meeting held on 27-1-1979. The, punishment inflicted was to the effept that the benefit of his success in them Year B.A. Examination held during May 1978 was denied to him. He was also debarred from, the said Exammation till October 1978 and was permitted to, appear for II Year B.A. Examination only during April 1979 and onwards.

(3.) Aggrieved by the said notification, the petitioner has approached this court under Art. 226(1) (b) and (c) of the Constitotion for relief, mainly contending, that the order inflicting the punishment o,n him as indicated in Ext.-J was not only devoid of merit but also in violation of the Rules of natural justice inasmuch ss he was not confronted with any incriminating statement made by any witnesses, particularly, the said student Sridharamurthy who appears to have, pleaded guilty tp the charge of copying, before the Malpractices Committee and subject such witnesses for cross-examination by the petitioner.