PRAVESH KUMAR Vs. VICECHANCELLOR B H U

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Having failed before the learned single Judge to get any relief, the writ petitioner has preferred the present special appeal.

(2.) Banaras Hindu University (hereinafter referred to as the University) has an Institute of Medical Sciences which imparts instructions for M.B.B.S. course. Post Graduate Courses for M.D. and M.S. degrees and super specialities leading to D.M. and M.Ch. degrees. There are 55 general seats besides 4 seats for foreign nationals in the M.B.B.S. course. The admission to M.B.B.S. course is done on the basis of a competitive examination known as Pre-Medical Test (for short PMT). The appellant claims to have applied and appeared in PMT-2000. The result of the said examination was declared on June 25, 2000 in which his name stood at serial No. 29 in the merit list. He was issued a call letter to appear for counselling on July 25. 2000. The admission committee, which consisted of five members of the Institute, found substantial difference in the handwriting on the application form submitted by the appellant with the handwriting on the documents which the appellant had filled in and signed at the time of counselling. The appellant was asked to explain the said discrepancy who gave in writing in his own hand that the application form had not been filled in by him but had been filled in by his friend Mohd. Vakil Khan and it was he who had signed on the application form and admit card. The appellant was called again on July 18, 2000 and meanwhile opinion from a handwriting expert was obtained who opined that the handwriting on the aforesaid documents were of different persons. Thereafter the Director and Chairman of the Admission Committee of the Institute of Medical Sciences passed an order on July 21, 2000 cancelling the candidature of the appellant. This order was challenged by the appellant by filing the writ petition which was dismissed by the learned single Judge on August 24, 2000.

(3.) Sri R. N. Singh and Sri A. P. Shahi learned counsel for the appellant have submitted that the appellant having been allowed to appear in the entrance examination, the University was estopped from taking a plea that the writ petitioner Pravesh Kumar son of Sabhajit Singh did not himself appear in the examination and as such, the cancellation of his candidature is illegal. Learned counsel have also submitted that opinion of the handwriting expert was obtained behind the back of the appellant and the same was not shown to him and, therefore, the principles of natural justice have been violated. Lastly, it has been urged that University should have held an enquiry as to whether the appellant Pravesh Kumar had himself appeared in the entrance examination or someone else had impersonated for him and in absence of such an enquiry, the cancellation of his candidature was not proper.