DEBABRATA BANERJEE Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN C. R. No. 9693 (W) of 1982 Debabrata banerjee and one Jayanta Kumar Ban-erjee filed an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India impugning a decision dated 1st "september 1931 under memo No. 1403 (T)E issued by the Secretary State Council of Engineering and Technical Education, West Bengal conveying to them the decision of the Senior Board of Examination and syllabus taken in their 92nd meeting held on 20. 8. 81 whereby the examination of all papers of the Licentiate in engineering Part- IV Examination of. 14 candidates including those of the petitioners, all belonging to Kanyapur Polytechnic, Asansol - 4 was treated as cancelled and they were debarred from appearing at the two successive Part- IV examination to be held on 1982 and 1983. This was on a finding that the said 14 candidates including the petitioners indulged in gross indiscipline including disturbance in Examination Hall, misbehaviour, threatening, copying and damage of Government properties while appearing at the Licentiate in Engineering Part- IV Examination held by the state Council for Engineering and Technical Education, West Bengal in May 1981 at Kanyapur Polytechnic Examination Centre. It is the. contention of the petitioners that on 21st May, 1981 they sat for and completed the said examination and left the place after completing the examination on 22nd May, 1981. They got an information that on 21st' may 1981 that), there was some disturbance where some outsiders and some students of the institution participated. They further aver that on those days the classes of 1st year 2nd year and 3rd year were going on. They deny to have adopted any unfair practice in the said examination and they on the other hand contend that they all along-obeyed the directions of the teacher who was in charge of the said examination Centre and this fact was known to the Principal concerned and the. Principal gave certificates on 26. 6. 81 and 22. 7. 81 in favour of the petitioners stating that they did bear a good moral character. On 15th september 1981 they received a notice where by they were given to understand that all the papers of the examination stood cancelled on the ground of gross-indiscipline, misbehaviour and disturbance in examination hall and various other allegations. The petitioners Referred to a G. D. Entry lodged on 21. 5. 81 where from it transpired that the said examination held on the same day passed off peacefully and just after the end of the examination, certain disturbance occurred and from the report it further revealed that other students caused mischief. The petitioners pleaded innocence. Their contention is that there were '71 candidates but the respondents arbitrarily picked up 14 candidates including the petitioners for cancellation of their examination. The petitioners never indulged in gross-discipline including disturbance in the examination hall, misbehaviour threatening, copying and damaging the government properties and all the Allegations against them were false and the petitioners left the examination hall after submitting their papers and completed their Part-TV examination smoothly. The G. D. Entry no. 1245 dated 21. 5. 81 also revealed that, the names of the petitioners did not transpire in the said report. The contention of the petitioners is that they have not been given any opportunity to meet the. specific allegations against them. They never participated in any disciplinary practice as alleged and decision of the Senior Board of Examination and Syllabus was an arbitrary decision illegally made, behind the back of the petitioners, in a mechanical mariner, picking up at random some students candidates including the petitioners who never indulged1 in gross- in- discipline of copying. The petitioners represented be fore the respondent no. 3 through the respondent no. 4 and the- copies of the representation are marked as annexure d and D2 respectively. The petitioners were directed to attend before the Secretary of the Council at 1, Kiran Sankar roy Road on 5. 12. 81 at 2 RM. The said secretary refused to hear their version and also refused to keep any evidence about their attendance. The petitioners stated that the attitude shown by this respondent no. 3 proved clearly a mala-fide motive and biased attitude towards the petitioners since the said respondent refused to hear the petitioners. The very fact that the petitioners were deprived from appearing in the examination to be held in 1982 and 1983, showed the same to be a vindictive decision arbitrarily made. The petitioners thus lost three academic years which virtually ruined their earner.

(2.) IN the other application filed by sanjib Kumar Das and Naba Gopal Ghosh the self-same contentions were raised and they also impugned the decision of cancellation Part- IV examination as also the further decision so as to debar the petitioners Sanjib Kumar Das and naba Gopal Ghosh from appearing in the two successive part- IV examinations to be held in 1982 and 1983. |

(3.) MR. Amar Nath Banerjee, learned advocate for the respondents in his fairness submitted that those candidates who tendered their unqualified apology over the incidents, relating to 21st May. 1981 were allowed to appear in the examination for the subsequent years and the petitioner no. 2 in the "writ application of debabrata Banerjee i. e. Jayanta Kumar banerjee was such a candidate. I was also given to understand at the hearing that Jayanta Kumar Banerjee does not wish to proceed with the present writ application.