GULAB PRINZE Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenging the order of respondent nos. 2 and 3 in cancelling the examination of the petitioner, who had appeared in the Post Graduate Diploma in Computer Application Examination, conducted in the year 2010-11, the petitioner has filed this writ petition. The petitioner was a student, who was pursuing a course in the Post Graduate Diploma in Computer Application and was student of ACCA, College, Jabalpur. The college is affiliated with the Makhan Lal Chaturvedi National University of Journalism and Communication, Bhopal. The petitioner appeared in the examination which was conducted for the academic session 2010-11 with Roll No. 243462 and was allotted examination Centre in Narmada College, Sadar, Jabalpur. After the petitioner appeared in the examination and when the result was declared, petitioner's result was shown to be cancelled on account of using of unfair means. Inter alia contending that the petitioner has not indulged in using unfair means, his result has been withheld in a illegal manner and before taking the action impugned, no show cause notice or opportunity of hearing was granted, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

(2.) On notice being issued, the respondents have filed reply and it is pointed out by the respondents that as per the Rules and Regulations applicable, if the candidate is found to be using unfair means in the conduct of examination, then the procedure for taking action is regulated by the appropriate procedural regulation as contemplated in Annexure R-1. It is said that with regard to the petitioner in the examination, which was conducted in May-June 2011, it was found that the petitioner was using unfair means and therefore, his entire result was cancelled. It is said that from the petitioner a plastic scale was seized in which certain written material was available and therefore, holding the petitioner to have used unfair means with the help of the scale, which was seized, action was taken by the appropriate examination committee, as is evident from the report submitted by this committee, available at page no. 17 of the return filed by the petitioner.

(3.) Shri Pushpendra Kaurav, learned counsel for respondent nos. 2 and 3 has submitted that as the petitioner was found using unfair means in the examination and the material i.e. the scale had certain answers scribbled on, was seized from the petitioner, accordingly the impugned action is taken.