LAWS(APH)-1998-3-46

SAINT JOSEPH EDUCATION SOCIETY Vs. KRISHNADEVARAYA UNIVERSITY

Decided On March 04, 1998
SAINT JOSEPH EDUCATION SOCIETY Appellant
V/S
KRISHNADEVARAYA UNIVERSITY Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed by the petitioner-Saint Joseph Education Society, Anantapur, seeking a Writ of Certiorari for quashing the order of the respondent-Sri Krishnadevaraya University, represented by its Registrar, Anantapur, Anantapur District, in No. SKU/Exams/36/97, dated 16-01-1998.

(2.) The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner-Society is running both High School and Degree College. Right from the inception of the College, it was being allotted examination centre in respect of degree examinations. There was no complaint whatsoever against the College. The examinations for the degree classes for March, 1997 were held without any complaint whatsoever. However, the Controller of Examinations of the respondent sent a letter dated 7-7-1997 to the Principal, CVLNR Degree College, Anantapur to collect the explanation from the concerned for taking further action. The respondent- University informed the petitioner about the alleged malpractices that have occurred in the examination centre at the College of the petitioner in March, 1997. Certain malpractices, as alleged, are as follows,

(3.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the order of the University is wholly illegal and arbitrary offending Article 14 of the Constitution of India. He also submits that the enquiry was conducted behind back of the petitioner and even the report of the Enquiry Committee was not furnished to the petitioner, on which basis, the impugned order has been passed. Therefore, the impugned orders are in gross violation of principles of natural justice. Learned Counsel for the petitioner also submits that even in administrative decisions, the petitioner is entitled for reasonable opportunity as it affects the status of the institution, when once the examination centre is withdrawn by the respondent-University. He lastly submits that even on merits, such an order could not have been passed as it is understood that the Enquiry Committee did not directly attribute the malpractices to the institution and that these alleged malpractices could have taken place outside the examination centre viz., at the spot valuation centre, Chief Superintendent Office, etc. For these reasons, the impugned orders are liable to be quashed.