SHINU ABRAHAM Vs. M G UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners are final year students of BCA (Bachelor in Computer Application) in the S.A.S. S.N.D.P. Yogam College, Konny. This is a course of three year duration consisting of six semesters. Petitioners have completed six semesters and have also appeared for viva voice. In March, 1998, petitioners had appeared for the IVth semester examination. Result of the IVth semester examination of the petitioners and 12 others were withheld. The allegation, it appears, is that there was malpractice of copying in the paper 'Programming in C'. Petitioners were not informed why the results were withheld Petitioners will not be declared to have passed BCA examination unless results of IVth semester examination is published. According to the petitioners, there is no malpractice. The supervisors in the examination hall did not notice any malpractice. Out of the 18 students whose marks were withheld, it is stated that results of 12 students were published later. But, the petitioners were singled out. According to the petitioners, no enquiry was conducted and their results were withheld without any enquiry and without any reason. Therefore, the Original Petition is filed to dispose of Ext. P1 representation and also to publish the results of IVth semester examination of the BCA course.

(2.) The University filed a detailed statement and also produced the concerned file. It appears that the Examiners in the Centralised Valuation Camp reported that in the answer books of 18 students answers to certain questions in 'Programming in C' were similar and, therefore, they have requested the University to take appropriate action. It is stated that the Syndicate at its meeting appointed Prof. Mohan Kurian and Smt. Bindu K. as enquiry officers to report on the suspected cases of malpractice and decided to cancel the results of the candidates who are found guilty. Petitioners' results were finally withheld based upon the report. It is also submitted that a notice dated 30.8.1999 which was signed on 16.9.1999 was issued to the petitioners stating that the Sub-committee of the Syndicate on Students Welfare and Discipline after due consideration proposed that the examination taken by the petitioners has to be cancelled and a show cause notice was also issued why proposed penalty shall not be imposed.

(3.) This Original Petition is filed on 20.8.1999. The show cause notice were signed only on 16.9.1999 and admittedly, not received by the petitioners at the time of filing the Original Petition. In the statement dated 20.9.1999 also it is not stated that a show cause notice was issued to the petitioners. In any event, petitioners were informed about the malpractice only for the first time after more than one and a half year of writing the examination as they wrote the examination in March, 1998, and show cause notice was signed on 16.9.1999. Files placed before me also shows that not even a single communication was given to the petitioners before the issuance of the present show cause notice, that too, after filing of the Writ Petition and the petitioners-students were kept in the dark till now. It is also fairly submitted by the learned standing Counsel that before issuance of the show cause notice no communications were issued to the petitioners.