OM PRAKASH BAJPAI Vs. GURU GHASIDAS UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, a practising Advocate at Bilaspur, enrolled as an Advocate by the M. P. State Bar Council on 31-3-1986, has filed this petition under Articles 226/227, Constitution of India, praying (i) to quash the Notification dated 25-1-1986 (Annexure-B) of respondent- No. 1 Guru Ghasidas University, Bilaspur (for short, called Bilaspur University) imposing the punishment of cancelling his Examination of LL. B. Final 1985, and further debarring him from appearing at Supplementary Examination of 1985 and the main examination of 1986 (ii) The petitioner has also challenged the Resolution Item No. 8 in the Agenda of the Executive Council of Ravi Shanker University, Raipur (for short, called Raipur University) rejecting the Explanation/appeal by the petitioner and further Resolution cancelling his LL. B. Final Examination (Supplementary Examination) 1985, withdrawal of LL. B. Degree and communication thereof to M. P. State Bar Council (Respondent No. 3), which would result in cancellation of his enrolment as an Advocate. (This is impugned Annexure-F dt. 25-11-1988 ). The orders passed in this petition (M. P. No. 4115/88) would also govern the disposal of M. C. C. No. 587/88 which is a review/petition against the orders dated 14-10-1988 passed in M. P. No. 3005/88 against the show cause notice issued by Raipur University for cancellation of the Examination of LL. B. Part III and withdrawal of the Degree, which was dismissed summarily.

(2.) ACCORDING to the petitioner, the academic bio-data for the decision of the petition is: that, he passed annual LL. B. Part I Examination in 1982 from Raipur University, and thereafter, cleared LL. B. Part II Supplementary Examination in the year 1982, also from Raipur University; that, he "unsuccessfully appeared" in LL. B. Part III Examination of 1983 and Supplementary Examination of 1983 from Raipur University; that, Bilaspur was earlier within the jurisdiction of Raipur University, but in the year 1984, Bilaspur University was carved out from Raipur University; and according to the petitioner, the erstwhile students of Raipur University were eligible to appear in Bilaspur University in the year 1984; that he appeared in annual examination of 1985 LL. B. Part III; but his result of the Annual Examination 1985 was "withheld" by Bilaspur University; that, the Bilaspur University (respondent No. 1) did not serve any show cause notice originally in the Annual Examination 1985; that, he had made an application for appearance in 1985 Supplementary Examination of Raipur University - as an Ex-student, and in the application form (sample pro forma Annexure-G), in Col. 8, he frankly disclosed the fact that he had appeared in Bilaspur University Annual Examination of 1985 and also mentioned the Roll No.- and the fact that his result has been "withheld". The petitioner further states, that by the impugned Notification dated 25-1-1986 (Ann.-B); the Bilaspur University imposed the punishment of cancelling his annual examination of LL. B. Part III of 1985 and debarred him from Supplementary Examination of 1985 and Annual Examination of 1986 but he was never issued any show cause notice, nor granted any opportunity of hearing before imposition of the said punishment on him. The petitioner further avers, that he learnt about passing of some orders of punishment on him by Bilaspur University only when he was served with a show cause notice dated 23rd of August, 1988 (Annexure-D) issued by Raipur University wherein he was called upon to show cause as to why his result of having passed Supplementary Examination of LL. B. Part III from Raipur University in the year 1985 be not cancelled because of Bilaspur University's Notification dated 25-1-1986 (Annexure-B ). The petitioner submitted his reply dated 9-9-1988 (Ann.-E), explaining the circumstances and justifying dropping of the adverse proceedings under the impugned show cause notice, and also made applications to both the Universities to supply him copies of the proceedings by which adverse action (Ann.-B) was taken against him. The petitioner having been supplied the copy of the Notification dated 25-1-1986 as late as on 1-12-1988, he has challenged the Notification dated 25-1-1986 (Ann.-B) as also the impugned Resolution No. 8 (Ann.-F) dated 25-11-1988 of Raipur University. The grounds of challenge are as follows:

(3.) (i ). The respondent No. 1 i. e. Bilaspur University filed Returns and alleged, that the petitioner was caught "using unfair means and was in possession of the incriminating material in the Examination Hall", on 24-5-1985, in solving the questions of the paper "taxation Law" of LL. B. Examination of April, 1985; and therefore, Bilaspur University did not declare his result and referred the matter to the Committee appointed by the Executive Council for disposal of unfair means cases. The Committee was appointed under the provisions of Ordinance 5. After taking into consideration the report of the Centre Superintendent and the concerned Examiner, as provided in that Ordinance, the Committee proposed to award the penalty and as per procedure laid down in Para (Clause) 23 of the Ordinance No. 6, a show cause notice dated 3-12-1985 was issued to the petitioner asking him as to why the proposed penalty may not be imposed on him and further stating, that if no reply is received from him within 15 days from the date of the issue of the show cause notice, the University shall take ex parte decision. (Copy of show cause notice - Ann. R-1 dated 3-12-1985 ). (ii) It is, however, averred that the petitioner did not submit any explanation, and therefore, as a matter of fact, the petitioner used the incriminating material for answering the questions, he was awarded the penalty of cancelling the Examination of LL. B. Final 1985 and was further debarred from appearing at the Supplementary Examination 1985 and the main examination of 1986. (iii) It is further alleged that like other cases of students, the award of penalty was communicated to the petitioner as well as to the Principals of the Colleges concerned, vide letter No. dated 25-1-1986. Thus, the petitioner was given sufficient time and opportunity to defend, as laid down in Clause 23 of Ordinance 6. It is denied that the petitioner came to know about the passing of those orders of punishment only on 23-8-1988, as alleged by him. It was petitioner's right to know the result of the Examination and to get a copy of statement of marks within the stipulated time of 3 months from the date of the last day of examination, but knowing well that he used unfair means and was in possession of incriminating material, he had no courage to approach the Bilaspur University for that purpose. Accordingly, it is alleged that there is no violation of the principles of natural justice; nor any provisions of the Ordinance.