PRAFULLA KUMAR DEKA Vs. GAUHATI UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner who is the Controller of the Gauhati University assalls an order dated 12. 12. 2005 placing him under suspension.

(2.) THE brief facts which will be necessary to be noticed for an adjudication of the issues arising in the present writ petition may be conveniently set out below: on 20. 6. 2005 a news item came to be reported in a leading local newspaper of the State to the effect that a College Principal and five College Teachers along with two others have been arrested by the Nagaon Police in connection Nagaon P. S. Case No. 449/2005 under Sections 120-B/407/468/420/34, IPC. As per the aforesaid newspaper report the arrested persons were involved in serious anomalies in the evaluation of the answer scripts of B. A. Part-I and Part-II examinations of the year 2005 held by the Gauhati University. The Vice-Chancellor of the University immediately deputed the petitioner and one Prof. J. N. Ganguly of the University to make an enquiry in the matter. The petitioner along with Prof. Ganguly went to Nagaon, investigated into what was reported in the media and also met the persons who were arrested. Thereafter, the team constituted by the Vice-Chancellor submitted its report on 24. 6. 2005 wherein the commission of serious anomalies in the evaluation of answer scripts by the arrested persons were mentioned. Shortly put, in the report submitted it was mentioned that answer scripts which were allotted to some examiners were found in the custody and possession of the arrested persons and one of the arrested person, Abdul Matlib, had established contact with some of the candidates and had given them an opportunity to write the answers again so as to enable them to improve their performance.

(3.) ON receipt of the report of the enquiry team as aforesaid the Vice Chancellor placed the matter before the Executive Council of the University. The said Body constituted a two member Enquiry Committee consisting of Mr. Justice D. N. Choudhury (Retd.) and one Sri K. K. Bora, former Chairman, Assam Higher Secondary Education Council. The aforesaid Enquiry Committee, upon due verification of the relevant facts and circumstances, submitted its report to the Vice Chancellor on 29. 8. 2005. In the report so submitted the Enquiry Committee had found the petitioner to be responsible for certain lapses which had faciliated the commission of the illegalities/irregularities as noticed above. Shortly put, the committee in its report dated 29. 8. 2005 had recorded that the Examination Reforms Committee, which was constituted pursuant to a decision of the Academic Council dated 15. 10. 2001, in a meeting held on 5. 10. 2002 had recommended that a meeting of the Zonal Officers be held to discuss the measures necessary to streamline the examination system. The University, it must be noticed, had divided the area under its jurisdiction into 16 Zones with a Zonal Officer as the head of each zone. Thereafter, a meeting of the Zonal Officers was held on 21. 1. 2003 wherein, amongst others, it was decided that the appointment of examiners will henceforth be made by the Zonal Officers. The aforesaid practice which came in vogue from the year 2003 was identified by the Justice Choudhury Committee to be the primary reason responsible for the irregularities committed. The Enquiry Committee, in its report, also recorded that though the decision taken in the meeting of the Zonal Officers was approved by the Vice chancellor, such approval was granted without any meaningful consultation and deliberations for which initiative should have been taken by the petitioner as the Controller of Examinations. The Committee in its report dated 29. 8. 2005 had also recorded that the controller of Examinations ought to have apprised the Vice Chancellor of the implications of the decision taken in the meeting of the Zonal Officers before presenting the proposal for the Vice Chancellor's approval.