ROORKEE UNIVERSITY Vs. DIVYA CHANDRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Km. Divya Chandra, Respondent No. 1 in this Special Appeal, was a student op B. E. (Elec.) of University of Roorkee (hereinafter referred to as the University). She passed both semesters of B. E. (Elec.) first year with 55.3 and 65.9 percent marks and autumn semester of second year with 61,6 percent. She also appeared in 2nd year's spring semester is which she secured 85.2 percent marks. After the declaration of her result of the second year's spring semester in which she secured extremely high marks, fellow students raised agitation and also made representation to Head of the Department, alleging gross irregularities , and manipulations in her examination result The Vice-Chancellor of the University appointed an inquiry committee on 26-8-1986 consisting of. Dr. K.G. Ranga Raju as Chairman and Dr. N.K. Nanda and Dr. R. Snhasan as members in order to find out whether there is any reason to believe that there has been any irregularity in evolution of the performance of Km. Divya Chandra. This committee was to make preliminary Inquiry and to submit a report. The Committee submitted a report on the basis of which the Vice-Chancellor appointed another committee consisting of Dr. A. R. Chandrasekaran as Chairman and three Professors as the members on 16-9-1986. This committee was known as 'Unfair Means Committee' and was appointed to inquire into the alleged use of unfair means by Km. Divya Chandra. The Chandrasekaran committee issued a notice on 24-9-1986 to Km. Divya Chandra, calling upon her to present her case before it. The students, who had raised complaint against Km. Divya Chandra started agitation and resorted to hunger strike so as to pressurise the Vice-Chancellor to appoint a committee consisting of persons to be selected from the list of the teachers given by them to the Vice-Chancellor. List of the teachers given by the students contained nine names. In view of the pressure exerted by the students, the Vice-Chancellor dissolved the Chandrasekaran committee and appointed another committee consisting of Prof. S. K. Saraf (Chairman) and four other teachers as members. Names of Prof. Saraf and other teachers, who were members of this committee, were taken from the list of nine teachers submitted by the students to the Vice-Chancellor. Km. Divya Chandra filed Writ Petition No. 8499 of 1987 before this Court, challenging the appointment of the inquiry committee headed by Prof. S. K. Saraf. Learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition, holding that the constitution as well as the proceedings of the Saraf committee were against the principles of natural justice, fairplay and good conscious. It was further held that members of the Saraf committee were biased against Km. Divya Chandra and the inquiry report submitted by this committee is ultra vires and was declared invalid and nonest. With the result the inquiry proceedings and the inquiry report were set aside and any punishment imposed on Km. Divya Chandra on the basis of the inquiry report was declared to be nonest and the University authorities were directed to treat the disciplinary proceeding against her as closed.

(2.) University has filed this special appeal against the aforesaid judgment of the learned Single Judge. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

(3.) Sri Dinesh Kackar, learned Counsel for the Appellant has made three submissions in support of this appeal, namely, (i) there is no justification for declaring the constitution of the committee headed by Praf. Saraf as illegal, (ii) findings of the learned Single Judge on the question of reasonable apprehension of bias are uncalled for and there is no material in support thereof; and (iii) learned Single Judge was not justified in closing the inquiry after declaring the constitution and the report of the Saraf Committee as illegal. Sri Ravi Kant, learned Counsel for Km. Divya Chandra has disputed the above submissions and has pressed for dismissal of the appeal.