USHA RANI Vs. UNIVERSITY OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS special appeal has been preferred u/s. 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance, 1949 against the order dated 12. 8. 1998 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4013/98, by which the writ petition filed by the petitioner-appellant was dismissed.

(2.) THE facts which are relevant for deciding the controversy herein briefly are that the appellant who is a Lecturer Ist Grade appeared in the examination of paper, `purana Itihas' of `acharya' Part-II Examination, 1997 which was held on 17. 7. 97 at Maharaja Sanskrit College, Jaipur. During the examination, a case of unfair means was registered against the appellant on the allegation that she was caught with material using unfair means. THE appellant has controverted this story alleging that the real facts are different. While invigilator Vinod Kumar Sharma misbehaved with her as a result of which she had slapped him. Consequently, being annoyed, the invigilator threatened her to get her debarred from the aforesaid examination. She lodged the FIR with the police against the invigilator. THErefore, she made series of representations to the higher authorities as well as the State Government for demand of justice. THE appellant received a letter dated 11. 11. 97 intimating her that her case is to be considered by the UM Standing Committee appointed for the purpose at its meeting held on 20. 11. 97. Against this letter, she submitted a representation explaining the whole incident in detail. She also confirmed that she would personally appear before the Committee seeking personal audience in the matter and she did appear before the said Committee on 20. 11. 97 itself. As per the appellant's case, the Committee allowed her to give answers to the five written questions. THEreafter, vide impugned order dated 24. 6. 98, the appe-llant was informed as under: " THE UM Standing Committee has also come to the conclusion that the report of the examiner proved copying in the answer-book and on the basis of your confession on the record and evidence taken by the Committee an act of gross indiscipline and misconduct has been proved. "

(3.) DURING the course of hearing, learned counsel for the appellant further contended that the appellant had neither made any confessional statement nor any opportunity of leading evidence was extended to her by the Committee and the decision has been taken in absence of any cogent material available on the record. It has further been contended that she was not supplied with the relevant material so as to controvert the same in her defence. In support of his contentions, he placed reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court in case of Prem Prakash Kaluniya vs. The Punjab University (1); and of this Court in case of Ajay Singh vs. The Board of Technical Education & Anr. We have examined the ratio of the aforesaid decisions. We are of the view that the same are distinguishable being not applica-ble to this case.