KAMALENDU PRASAD PADHI Vs. SAMBALPUR UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner appeared at the Final B. A. Examination of 1974 from the G. M. College, Sambalpur affiliated to the Sambelpur University. His result was withheld on the ground that he had adopted unfair means at the Examination in Political Science Paper II and Psychology Paper I held on 24-4-74 and 10-5-74 respectively. On 12-8-74 he was served with a charge-sheet to show cause against the alleged malpractice. The charge-sheet runs as follows :

(2.) Petitioner's contention is that there being no evidence available to the Enquiry Committee he was exonerated of the charges and his result was published under Annexure 3 and the same cannot be cancelled unilaterally. It is also contended that petitioner having already acted on the basis of the published result, the University authorities are estopped from recalling the said result to his prejudice.

(3.) The opposite parties in their counter-affidavit denied that there was any violation of the principles of natural justice and averred that on the reports received from the Invigilators and the Centre Superintendent, charges were framed against the petitioner for having adopted unfair means in the examination of the Political Science (Hons.) Paper II and Psychology Paper I (Pass). He appeared at the enquiry held by the Disciplinary Committee on 19-874 when the reports of the Invigilators and the Centre Superintendent were shown to him and he was afforded full opportunity to defend himself. On a consideration of the reports of the Invigilators and the Centre Superintendent and also the written explanation and the oral statement of the petitioner the Committee came to the conclusion that the allegations of malpractice relating to Psychology Paper I had not been established beyond reasonable doubt and exonerated him of that charge. But the Committee found him guilty for having adopted malpractice in Political Science (Hons.) Paper II and recommended to the Syndicate that the petitioner's result should be cancelled and he should be debarred from appearing at any Examination prior to the Second B.A. Examination of 1975. Though the petitioner was found guilty of the charge relating to malpractice in Political Science (Hons.) Paper II, by mistake the Notification in Anne-xure 3 was issued by the Deputy Registrar of the University declaring the petitioner to have passed the Examination. Shortly after the issue of the Provisional Certificate (Annexure 4) to the petitioner the aforesaid mistake was detected in the office of the University and accordingly the Notifications in Annexures 6 and 7 were issued on 11-9-74 and 17-9-74 respectively. It was asserted that the University had full jurisdiction to correct the unfortunate mistake and there is no question of estoppel.