M P KAURA Vs. GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is working as Lecturer at the S.L. Bawa D.A.V. College, Batala. He challenges the order dated January 17, 1992, passed by the University by which the decision taken by the Syndicate in its meeting held on November 15,1991 was conveyed to him. The Syndicate had decided that in view of the report of the enquiry committee indicating the petitioner for helping the students during the course of the University examination held in April/May, 1990, his "remuneration is forfeited and under Ordinance 17 (University Calendar 1991 Volume II, Part B, page 607), his approval as lecturer is withdrawn." A copy of this order has been produced as Annexure P-15 with the writ petition. A few facts as J appearing from the pleadings of the parties and documents may be briefly noticed. 1

(2.) The petitioner joined service as a Lecturer in Political Science at the respondent-College in the year 1970. In 1990, the petitioner was appointed as Deputy Superintendent (Outside) for the University examination to be held in April/May. II was his duty to ensure that no 'outside' help was rendered to any candidate during the examination. On April 21, 1990, certain members of the supervisory staff com plained to the Centre Superintendent that the petitioner has "tried, dictate the objective questions to the students in the subject of Political Science (B.A. I) These complaints were forwarded by the Centre Superintendent to the Principal of the respondent-College. The principal looked into the matter at his own level, He talked to the members of the staff personally to ascertain the facts. He even spoke to the Examination Clerk and the Peons etc. who were on duty. On July 28,1990 he sent a note to the petitioner conveying the allegations and requested him to "send his explanation before the matter is reported to the higher authorities." The. petitioner chose not to respond. Finally, vide letter dated September 19, 1990, the Principal sent the case to the Controller of Examination, Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar. On receipt of this letter, the Assistant Registrar (Conduct) sent communication dated October 31, 1990 to the petitioner pointing out that which working as Deputy Superintendent (Outside) he had "managed to enter one of rooms of the Centre and dictated one Objective Type question to the students of B.A. Part-I who were appearing on that day in their Political Science paper. Such a behaviour on the part of a teacher, much less (then) a member of the Supervisory Staff whose primary duty is to ward off use of unfair means by the candidates------- is highly deplorable." The petitioner was called upon to explain his position. He was also asked to see the officer on November 12, 1990. It appears that the petitioner did not send any written reply. He suggests that he had appeared before the Assistant Registrar. Be that as it may, the Vice Chancellor appointed a committee consisting of Mr. I.S. Aujla, IA.S. (Retd.) and Mri Darshan Singh, Controller of Examinations to enquire into the matter. The petitioner was given notice to appear before the committee on January 28, 1991. He did not appear. Another notice was sent to him to appear on February 11, 1991. The petitioner conveyed that "he was on medical leave from 6.2.1991 to 16.2.1991." The committee accepted this position and directed the petitioner to appear on March 4, 1991. Again the petitioner did not appear. It was only on March 16, 1991, that the petitioner appeared. On that day, he requested for 10 days' time to enable him to prepare for the cross examination of Principal Madan Lal who had appeared as a witness before the committee. The petitioner also asked for certain documents. Having got this time the petitioner utilized the opportunity to represent that he did not expect justice from Mr. Darshan Singh, the Controller of Examinations. He requested that some body else may be appointed as a member of the committee. Vide order dated May 15, 1991, the Vice Chancellor accepted his request. Dr. Kashmir Singh, Reader in the Department of Laws, Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar was appointed as the second member of the enquiry committee.

(3.) The committee recorded the statements of certain persons including M/S R.P. Gupta, J.S. Mann, Anil Gupta and Centre Superintendent Mr. Kuljinder Singh. The petitioner was given an opportunity to cross-examine all the witnesses. Copies of some of the statements have been produced by the petitioner with the writ petition. The committee submitted its report dated September 17, 1991. A copy of this report has been produced as Annexure R-2 with the written statement filed by Mr. M.S. Johal, Registrar, Guru Nanak Dev University. After noticing the sequence of events and the statements made by the witnesses as also the written statement in defence filed by the petitioner, the committee found that the petitioner "instead of checking outside interference himself dictated the answers of objective questions to the students. It is an unbecoming act on the part of a teacher whose duty is to prevent such mal- practices. This act of Prof. M.P. Kaura was reprehensible. We, therefore, hold him guilty." The committee also pointed out that there was a lapse "on the part of the Principal Madan Lal who did not take prompt action on the complaint of the Centre Superintendent. As a result, Prof. M.E Kaura (the petitioner) was "not removed from his duties as Deputy Superintendent (Outside) as recommended by the Superintendent. The students who were helped by Prof. Kaura escaped action which could be taken under the unfair means if the matter had been reported to the University authorities immediately after the occurrence."