MRITUNJOY BHARADWAJ Vs. STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition, made under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India, discloses a, somewhat, insensitive dealing with a student by those, who have not only been vested, but also entrusted with certain duties expecting that they would, being involved in improvement of the educational system, disclose a sense of fairness and total absence of any sense of revenge. The respondents/authorities concerned appear to have dealt with the case at hand with single-minded conclusion from its inception that the fault lies with the petitioner and with none else though, strictly speaking, there is no such conclusive material and no such definite conclusion could have been reached without giving any effective opportunity to the petitioner to not only have his say in the matter, but also a right to cross-examine anyone, who might have been given a version of what had transpired at the examination hall, where the unfortunate incident, as revealed in the writ petition, had taken place. Even if the writ petitioner was at fault, his fault could have been brought to fore by resorting to the principles of natural justice and not arbitrarily and by ignoring what he had to say.

(2.) The impression, as depicted above, can be well-guessed by the facts as emerge from the pleadings of the parties and the materials on record.

(3.) I have heard Mr. N. Dutta, learned Senior counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, and Mr. A.D. Choudhury, learned Standing Counsel, Education Department. I have also heard Mr. T.C. Chutia, learned Standing Counsel, SEBA.