AJIT KUMAR ACHARYA Vs. VICE CHANCELLOR SHRI JAGANNATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner calls in question the office order dated 19.12.2003 (Annexure 6) of Shri Jagannath Sanskrit Viswa Vidyalaya, Puri, cancelling the petitioner's result of Shastri Examination, 2003 for involvement in mal practice during the examination.

(2.) THE petitioner was a student of Government Sanksrit College, Baripada and prosecuted Shastri Course under Shri Jagannath Sanksrit Viswa Vidyalaya. It is stated that the petitioner after completing the Part I of Shastri Course of two years duration appeared at the Part I Shastri Examination in the year 2002 and had done well in the examination without adopting any unfair means and passed the said examination. He also completed and passed the Part II examination held in 2003 and was placed in the Second division. While prosecuting the Acharya Course under the University, he was told by the Head of the Department that his Part I. Shastri Examination has been cancelled by the University on the ground of adoption of unfair means. The petitioner claims that since he was declared to have passed the Shastri Part I Examination in 2002 and was allowed to take the Shastri Part II examination 2003 and was declared pass, the result of Part I Shastri Examination, 2002 could not have been cancelled, that too after passing of Shastri Part II Examination.

(3.) IT is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that since the petitioner was allowed to take the Part II Shastri Examination, 2003 which he had taken and his result was published, the University could not have cancelled this examination on the ground that his result in Part I Examination was cancelled and he was debarred from appearing at the next examination, 2003. Per contra, the learned counsel for the University however submits that since the petitioner was aware of the fact that he was involved in mal practice, his result was withheld, he was given show cause notice, he replied to show cause notice and appeared for personal hearing before the Examination Committee, he could not have taken the advantage of appearing at the Part II Shastri Examination. In any event, the petitioner having adopted mal practice during the Part I of Shastri Examination and his result having been cancelled, neither he could appear at the Part II Examination nor the result of Shastri Examination could be declared in respect of the petitioner.