BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION CUTTACK Vs. GAYATRI HOTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Board of Secondary Education (hereinafter referred to as the Board) has preferred this Letters Patent Appeal, challenging the judgment dated December 6, 2000 passed by the learned Single Judge in OJC No.9210 of 2000, in exercise of powers conferred under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) Respondents 1 to 11, the students of Purohitpur High School in the district of Jagatsinghpur, filed the aforesaid writ application praying for quashing the Notification dated 12-9-2000 cancelling their results of Annual H.S.S Examination, 2000 on the ground of malpractice. The said Notification is annexed as Annexure-4 to the writ application.

(3.) Resorting to malpractice in examination has become chronic and serious problem and time has come when the same has to be dealt with utmost firmness and wisdom. It is the duty of the examining bodies- both legally and morally to check malpractice and punish those, who are indulging in it. This Court is always extremely reluctant to interfere with the decision of the constituted authorities in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, but then, unless the allegation of malpractice is proved beyond doubt future life of innocent students should not be permitted to be spoiled for all times to come. Such a finding, if arrived at recklessly, puts a stigma in the future of a student and haunts him throughout his life. Moreover punishment should not also be disproportionately harsh. Thus, a balance has to be arrived at while dealing with such cases.Law is no more res integra to the effect that, the High Court's power to issue a writ of certiorari is supervisory in nature and the court exercising it is not entitled to act as an Appellate Court. It flows, therefore,that the finding of fact arrived at on appreciation of evidence cannot ordinarily be re-opened or questioned in a writ proceeding unless interest of justice and fair-play demands it. An error of law or a finding of fact based on no evidence and/or a finding arrived erroneously on wrong interpretation of materials, evidence on the face of the records can be corrected by this court in exercise of supervisory jurisdiction. In the present case, the respondents 1 to 11 who are regular students of High School along with others appeared at the Annual H.S.C. Examination conducted by the Board in the year 2000. Their results were initially withheld by the Board. After the guardians approached the Controller of Examination, results of 53 students were declared on 1-7-2000 and notified on 4-7-2000, but on the other hand, the Board issued notice to the respondents to show cause as to why appropriate action should not be taken against them for their involvement in malpractice on the ground that some of the answers were identical in nature with other candidates. The respondents submitted their show cause denying the charges as baseless. Thereafter, a Notification cancelling their results was published which was impugned in the writ application.