ASHOK KUMAR Vs. PUNJAB UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Ashok Kumar petitioner sat in the Higher Secondary Final Examination of the respondent University held in April, 1964 under roll No. 57710. The result of the petitioner was with-held and a letter was sent to him in August, 1964 by the Registrar of the University informing the petitioner that there was a charge against him of his having used unfair means at the above said examination. He was called upon to appear before the University authorities on 19th August, 1964. In pursuance of the notice, the petitioner appeared before the Deputy Registrar where he was handed over a questionaire which had been prepared in advance in connection with the allegations against him. He filled in the replies to the seven questions contained therein and after handing over the same left the University office. No further inquiry was admittedly held into the matter in the presence of the petitioner. At the time of appearing before the Deputy Registrar of the University, the petitioner came to know that the allegation against him was that he allowed candidate bearing roll No. 57711, who was sitting behind the petitioner, to copy the answer to question No. 5 of English Paper B, as the answers of both the candidates to the said question were the same. The question in dispute was to fill in the blanks in ten different sentences. The seating arrangement mentioned above is not disputed. Thereafter the petitioner received letter, dated October 20, 1964 (copy annexure 'A' to the writ petition) whereby he was informed that the case of unfair means against him had been decided and that the petitioner had been disqualified for the years 1964 and 1965 under Regulation 12(b) of the Punjab University Calender 1962, Volume I (page 89). The said letter was addressed by the Assistant Registrar (Examinations) of the Punjab University to the Headmaster of the petitioner's school and appeared to have been forwarded in original to the petitioner. Thereupon Shri D.N. Aggarwal, Advocate for the petitioner, wrote to the Registrar of the University on 30th October, 1964 to supply to him a copy of the questionaire, a copy of the petitioner's answer to the disputed question, a copy of the answer given by roll No. 57711 to the same question, a copy of the report of the Examiner or Expert, if any, and a copy of the order of the Standing Committee of the University with its observations. In reply to the said request of the petitioner's counsel, the Deputy Registrar of the University sent communication dated November 12, 1964 of which annexure 'B' to the writ petition is a copy. In that letter, the University informed the petitioner's counsel that at the time of interrogation of the petitioner, he was shown all the accusations against him and he did not ask for the abovementioned copies at that time. It was added in the letter that inspite of this if the petitioner still wanted to examine the documents in question, he could do so in the University office on any working day between 9 A.M. to 12 hours within a week from the receipt of the letter.

(2.) It is in the above circumstances that this writ petition was filed on 2nd December, 1964 and came up before the Motion Bench (Dulat and P.C. Pandit, JJ.) on 17th December, 1964. In that day, the Motion Bench ordered the production of the record of the inquiry from the University. After seeing those records, the Bench (Dulat and Grover, JJ.) admitted the writ petition on January 25, 1965.

(3.) A written statement, dated 6th November, 1965 duly signed and verified by the Registrar of the Punjab University has been filed in reply to the writ petition. Almost the entire defence of the University is contained in para 5 of the written statement which is reproduced below verbatim :-