Y.V. CHANDRACHUD, J.

(1) THESE appeals arise out of a decision rendered by a full bench of the Punjab High court in various Writ Petition filed by the students of the Punjab University, who were disqualified for adopting unfair practices in the examinations. Most of them had copied from a common source. By a majority of 2 to 1, the High court by its judgment dated 31/03/1975 set aside the decisions of a committee appointed to inquire into the charges against the erring students. The judgment of the majority rests solely on the view that despite the circumstance that two members of the committee formed the quorum, the impugned decisions were vitiated by the fact that only 2 and not all the 3 members of the committee participated in the proceedings. Aggrieved by the majority judgment of the High court, the Punjab University, Chandigarh, has filed these appeals by a certificate granted by the High court on the ground that the appeals involve a substantial question of law of general importance which requires to be determined by this court.

(2) THE respondents to these appeals were detected in the use of unfair means by the supervisory staff at different examinations held by the Punjab University. The Deputy Registrar of the University issued notices to the respondents calling upon them to submit their replies to a questionnaire. Respondents denied having used unfair means in the examinations but their explanation having been found to be unsatisfactory, the charges were referred for inquiry and decision to the Standing Committee which was appointed to deal with cases of misconduct and use of unfair means at the university examinations.

(3) THE Standing Committee consisted of Shri G. L. Chopra, a retired Judge of the High court, Shri Ajmer Singh, an advocate who was formerly a minister of the Punjab government, and Shri Jagjit Singh, the Registrar of the university. The Standing Committee was appointed by the Syndicate of the university under Regulation 31 of the Punjab University Calendar, 1973, Volume II. In a meeting dated 17/08/1971 the Syndicate passed a resolution that two members shall form the quorum for the meetings of the Standing Committee appointed under Regulation 31. In everyone of the meetings, only two out of the three members of the Standing Committee were present.

(4) RESPONDENTS appeared before the Standing Committee which, on a consideration of their statements came to the unanimous conclusion that the respondents had adopted unfair means in the examinations. By the impugned decisions they were disqualified for varying terms. It is not alleged that the Standing Committee had committed breach of any of the procedural provisions or of the rules of natural justice. We may also mention in passing that none of the respondents took any objection during the inquiry that it was not competent to only two members of the Standing Committee to inquire into the charges. Before the High court also, the sole ground on which the decisions of the Standing Committee were challenged was that the decisions were without jurisdiction inasmuch as all the three members of the Standing Committee had not taken part in the meetings in which the decision to disqualify the respondents was taken.

(5) THE Punjab University, Chandigarh, was set up under the East Punjab Ordinance 1947, which was later replaced by the Punjab University Act, 1947. By S. 8 of the Act, the supreme authority of the university vests in the Senate consisting of the Chancellor, the Vicehancellor, ex-officio Fellows and Ordinary Fellows. S. 11(2) of the Act provides inter alia that the Senate shall exercise its powers in accordance with the statutes, rules and regulations for the time being in force. S. 20 of the Act provides that the Executive government of the university shall vest in the Syndicate consisting of the Vice-Chancellor as Chairman, the Directors of Public Instruction. Punjab, Haryana and Chandigarh, the Director of Educa