BEENA PHILIPOSE Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These Original Petitions are by a sister and brother. It was alleged that they secured admission to the M.B.B.S. Degree Course by producing fake mark lists showing inflated marks in the qualifying examinations. The Syndicate of the University of Kerala enquired into the matter, found them guilty of manipulating the mark lists and consequently cancelled the examinations taken by them. They challenge the said action of the Syndicate.

(2.) A Division Bench of this court while disposing of a batch of Original Petitions by judgment dated 23-12-1981 detected various irregularities in the conduct of examinations, preparation of mark lists and in the admission of students to various professional courses. In pursuance to the said decision, when the authorities enquired into the various aspects relating to the admission of students to professional courses, a large number of malpractices came to light. Bogus and fake mark lists were seen to have been used for securing admission to professional courses like medicine and engineering. It was revealed that the petitioners herein had resorted to such means in securing admission to M.B.B.S. Degree Course. Consequently, proceedings were taken against them and the University of Kerala passed Ext. P18 in O.P. No. 6898 of

(3.) Substantially identical questions arise in these Original Petitions. Therefore, we consider it advantageous to dispose of these original Petitions by a common judgment. We will narrate the short facts in O.P. No. 6898 of 1986 for a proper understanding of the case. The petitioner therein, namely, Smt, Beena Philipose, passed her B.Sc. Degree Examination in April, 1977. She got herself admitted to the M.B.B.S. Degree Course in the Medical College, Trivandrum. While she was in the fourth year, on 29-12-1981, the police filed a First Information Report, Ext. P1 in this case, before the Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court, Trivandrum. On 5-1-1982, the principal of the Medical College suspended the petitioner from the college as per Ext. P2 order. She challenged that order before this court by filing O.P. No. 249 of 1982. By Ext. P3 order dated 4-6-1982, the Controller of Examinations informed the petitioner that her results in B. Sc. Degree Examination and the first year M.B.B.S. Examination have been quashed and that she has been debarred from appearing in any examination till the enquiry against her is finally disposed of. Ext. P3 was challenged by the petitioner in O.P. No. 4232 of 1982. On 1-1-1983, the Controller of Examinations by Ext. P4 memo informed the petitioner that her results in the B. Sc. Degree Examination and the first year M.B.B.S. examination have been suspended and that she has been debarred from appearing in any examination pending enquiry into the alleged mark list forgery case. Enquiry Officer appointed by the Syndicate issued Ext. P5 memo of charges on 13-5-1982. The petitioner gave Ext. P6 reply on 5-6-1982. She wanted the assistance of a lawyer in the enquiry. When that was denied, she approached this court by filing O.P. No. 10195 of 1982. This court dismissed Original Petition Nos. 249 of 1982 and 4232 of 1982 along with similar Original Petitions filed by others, on 28-2-1983. O.P. No. 7733 of 1985 filed by the petitioner praying for a direction to allow her to continue her studies and to appear in the examinations, was dismissed by this court on 14-10-1985. Writ Appeal No. 511 of 1985 filed against the said decision was dismissed in limine on 30-10-1985. While disposing of O.P. No. 10195 of 1982 on 6-11-1985, this court allowed the petitioner to be represented by a lawyer at the enquiry. A new Enquiry Officer was appointed by the University. He issued a fresh memo of charges on 7-12-1985. The petitioner approached this court by filing O.P. No. 11084 of 1985 for quashing the said memo of charges. The Standing Counsel representing the University reported to this Court that the Enquiry Officer has resigned on account of the filing of the Original Petition and that a new Enquiry Officer will be appointed in his place. On the basis of that representation, this court disposed of O.P. No. 11084 of 1985. Thereupon the 5th respondent was appointed Enquiry Officer. He issued Ext. P9 memo of charges on 21-2-1986. He conducted the enquiry and filed his report, Ext. P16, dated 23-4-1986. The petitioner was served with a copy of the report and was asked to show cause why her B. Sc. Degree Examination should not be cancelled, why the Senate be not recommended to cancel the B. Sc. Degree conferred on her, why the M.B.B.S. Examinations taken by her during her course of study be not cancelled and why she be not permanently debarred from appearing in any examination of the University. The petitioner gave her reply, Ext. P17 on 23-5-1986. After considering the report and the explanation given by the petitioner the Syndicate passed final order, Ext. P18 dated 19-7-1986.