SUVENDU KUMAR Vs. SAMBALPUR UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this application under Art.226 of the Constitution, petitioner has assailed cancellation of his result in the Annual B.Com. Examination, 1987 and restriction imposed upon him from appearing at any examination prior to the Annual Examination of 1988 as per Notification dt. 7-6-1988 of Sambalpur University (Annexure-1).

(2.) Petitioner appeared at the Annual Bachelor in Commerce Examination conducted by the Sambalpur University in 1987 as a regular Student of Municipal College. Rourkela. Chancellor received a representation dt.1-5-1987 that there was chance of the petitioner adopting unfair means in the examination in connivance with some examiners at the time of valuation of the answer papers which were to be centrally valued at Government College, Rourkela which was a Zonal valuation Centre of Sambalpur University. Copy of the representation was forwarded by office of the Chancellor to the Controller of Examinations of Sambalpur University on 13-5-1987 for taking appropriate steps. Board of conducting examiners was accordingly, requested to take note of the same. After scrutiny of the answer scripts conducting Board found that the papers Accountancy and Advanced Accounting of the petitioner were mutilated. The inner pages of the answer papers were changed by inserting some new pages. Accordingly, the matter was referred to the Examination Discipline Committee with the report of the conducting Board on the basis of which petitioner was called upon to show, cause as follows :- "You appeared at the Annual B.Com. Examination of 1987 conducted by the Sambalpur University with Roll No. 21779 at Rourkela Municipal College Centre. It has been reported that you adopted unfair means at the Examination in Accountancy and Advanced Accounting paper on 28-4-87 and 12-5-1987. In this connection, I am directed to say that the following charges have been made against you. (G) It is reported that you have changed the inner pages of your Answer scripts in Accountancy and Advanced Accounting. 2. xxx xxx xxx 3. xxx xxx xxx 4. xxx xxx xxx"

(3.) Petitioner denied the allegation and stated that he would appear before the Examination Discipline Committee on the date fixed where the answer scripts in other papers were to be kept ready for verification and also for original report on which the charge was based. Petitioner appeared on the date fixed and after enquiry, result of the petitioner's examination was cancelled and he was debarred from appearing at any examination prior to Annual Examination of 1988.