SUKHSHAM KUMARI Vs. PUNJAB UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner took the Matriculation Examination in March, 1967 with roll No. 350230 at the examination centre located in the Government Higher Secondary School, Dera Baba Nanak. There were more than 200 examinees and no report of any sort of having used unfair means was made by the members of the supervisory staff against the petitioner. The petitioner received a letter from the Assistant Registrar of University dated August 2, 1967, informing her that a report had been made against her by the Head Examiner in the subject of Mathematics paper 'A'. It was suggested that she was guilty of having violated Regulation 13(b) given at page 106 of the Punjab University Calendar Volume I (1966), for giving and taking help. She was also informed that an enquiry would be held on August 19, 1967 at 9 A.M. in the office of the Principal, Government Higher Secondary School, Dera Baba Nanak, and at that time all the accusations against her and the material on which each accusation was based would be brought to her notice. The petitioner appeared before the Enquiry Officer on the said date and place and the Enquiry Officer interrogated the petitioner on the basis of a questionnaire to which the replies were given by her. Nothing further was heard from the University by the petitioner till she was informed by the Headmistress of her school that she had been disqualified by the University for two years. The petitioner obtained copies of the questionnaire and the order of the Standing Committee which have been filed as annexures 'C' and 'D' to the writ petition. Thereafter she filed the present writ petition in this Court on January 19, 1968 which was admitted on January 25, 1968.

(2.) The return to the writ petition has been filed by the Registrar of the University.

(3.) The charge against the petitioner is that she had copied answer to question No. I(a) from somewhere. This charge was based on the report of the Head Examiner which was concurred in by the Expert. The Standing Committee also came to the same conclusion. The petitioner in reply to the questions in the questionnaire stated that she had solved the questions herself and had not copied from anybody.