BHAGAT SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was admitted to the Art and Crafts Teachers Training Course for the session 1995-97 at the Government School of Arts, Rohtak. The petitioner having cleared the first year of the said course sat for the second year examination under Roll No. 2022. It is the petitioners case that on 1.7.1997 (the date on which the first paper was to be taken) respondent No. 4-P.N. Attri came into the room and threatened the petitioner with dire consequences and stated that he would start an unfair means case against him. He accordingly allegedly recovered a slip from the petitioner and on its basis, an unfair means case was initiated against him. It is further the petitioners case that no notice or opportunity was given to him to meet the allegation that had been levelled, and vide Annexure P-l, the petitioners result had been withheld on the ground that an unfairmeans case has been initiated against him. The petitioner moved a representation to the Headmaster, of the Institution praying that he be informed about his result for the second year examination, but the representation was returned with the observation that the result received from the Directorate had shown him as an U.M.C. case. The petitioner has accordingly come to this Court by way of the present writ petition.

(2.) In the written statement filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 3, the allegations made against them by petitioner have been denied and it has been stated that though the examination had commenced at 8 a.m. yet till 9 a.m. the petitioner had not even written a single line on his answer sheet, as he was unable to attempt the questions without the use of unfair means. It has also been pleaded that adequate opportunity of a hearing had been given to the petitioner, but he had not turned up before the unfair means committee and, as such, the order Annexure P-l had been rightly made against him. An additional affidavit has subsequently been filed in which, it has been pointed out that the unfair means committee consisted of respondent No. 4- P.N. Attri, Deputy District Vocational Education Officer, Rohtak (who had been appointed as the Chief Superintendent of the Examination) and the two other members were the Group Instructor, Incharge, Arts School, Rohtak and Sh. Kanwar Singh Yadav, the Assistant Directorate of Industrial Training and Vocational Education, Haryana, Chandigarh. It has been reiterated that the petitioner had been caught red handed by P.N. Attri himself and that he had deliberately not appeared before the unfair means committee.

(3.) It will be seen that serious allegations of mala fides have been made by the petitioner against respondent No. 4-P.N. Attri who has not even filed a reply of his own, despite notice. Moreover, it has been admitted that P.N. Attri was the Chief Superintendent of the Examination and that he had recovered that so called offending chit from the possession of the petitioner. It is also evident that P.N. Attri was the seniormost member of the unfair means committee. In this view of the matter, I am of the opinion that the petitioner has been deprived of a dispassionate decision on his unfair means case as P.N. Attri was not only the prosecutor but also the witness and the Judge. Moreover, serious allegations of mala fides have been levelled against him, which have not even been controverted in Court though he has been duly served.