LAWS(ALL)-1990-10-50

RENU TYAGI Vs. STATE OF U P

Decided On October 16, 1990
RENU TYAGI Appellant
V/S
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) KM. Renu Tyagi, Roll No. 182691 along with 30 more students whose roll numbers have been given below their names in Writ Petition No. 20899 of 1990 (hereinafter referred to as the first petition) and Arun Kumar, Roll No. 1139851 along with 21 more students whose roll numbers have also been given below their names in Writ Petition No. 22986 of 1990 (hereinafter referred to as the second petition), have filed these petitions under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the relief for a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to declare the result of the petitioners of the High School Examination, 1989. It has further been prayed that the respondents may be directed to allow the petitioners to appear in the Intermediate Examination, 1990-91 as they are studying in the 2nd year of the Intermediate.

(2.) AS the points involved for consideration in both these petitions are similar, hence it is convenient to dispose of these petitions by a common judgment.

(3.) SEVERAL answer books have been obtained including the answer book of petitioner No. 4 in the first petition (Roll No. 1140158 ). The answer books of petitioners and those students whose results were declared, have been perused by me in the presence of both the learned counsel. The charge against petition No. 4 was in respect of question No. 8 particularly with the words "videshi Vastron Ki Holi Jala Di" in Social Science Ist paper. Similar is the expression in the last sentence of the answer book of Roll No. 1139849 in Social Science Ist Paper whose result has been declared and the expression is "bhartiyon Ne Naukri Chhor Di Aur Videshi Vastron Ki Holi Jala Di". In question No. 5 also the expression was "vyavasthaon Ke Vikas Ke Sath Samudayik Bhawna Parne Lagi" as is clear from a perusal of the answer book of Roll No: 1139849. Question No. 8 also is answered in Roll No. 1139841 as "videshi Vastron Ki Holi Jala Di Gayee". Similar is the expression of petitioner No. 4 Km. Babita. A perusal of the answer books of students whose results have been declared and of those whose results have been withheld and later on cancelled, it is obvious that the answers are not exactly the same with mathematical accuracy, but except a word or so it is the same. But this is possible in case in respect of Social Science subject the answers are written and the language used is Hindi. On a perusal of answer books of those students whose results have been declared, I am of the view that similar expression in answers of question Nos. 5 and 8 in Social Science Ist Paper are in the answers of petitioners in both the petitions. The impugned orders of the respondents 2 and 3 in withholding the results of petitioners in both the petitions and later on cancelling the same are arbitrary, irrational and discriminatory. Art. 14 requires that an administrative or quasi judicial authority must always be guided by some standards or norms so that it does not degenerate into arbitrariness and operate unequally on persons similarly situate. In the present case in withholding and cancelling the result of petitioners unguided and unfettered discretion has been conferred on respondent Nos. 2 and 3. The principles to be applied in such matters were future career of students of High School age are involved, the principles to be applied must be equal and they must be applied with almost mathematical accuracy with absolutely no discrimination. The discrimination and arbitrariness is anathema in our secular, socialist democratic Republic.