( 1 ) THE aforementioned writ petitions were taken up together by consent of parties since common questions are involved. The writ petitioners have challenged the order of cancellation of admission to M. D. Course in the respective subjects in which they were admitted which was issued on 23-8-1993. The fact of such cancellation of admission was communicated by letter issued by the Secretary faculty council of P. G. Studies and medicine, nursing etc. dated 23-8-1993 which is contained in Annexure 'c' to the writ petitions. The writ petitioner Dr. Pawan Kumar Agarwal received the said letter of cancellation on 26-8-1993 and Dr. Adit Dey received it on 11th Sept. 1993. By letters dated 29-8-1993 and 12-9-1993 the petitioners duly protested against the said order of cancellation and demanded justice. However their representations remained unanswered.

( 2 ) ). In September, 1993 the writ petitioners filed the writ petitions. An interim order was passed by me on 23rd Sept. 1993 directing stay of operation of the order of cancellation till the disposal of the writ petitions. The University 6 authorities did not make any attempt to vacate the stay or to prefer an appeal. The petitioners continued their studies, completed the course and appeared at the final M. D. examination in their respective subjects in May, 1996. But so far as the petitioners are concerned their results were withheld by the respondent University. Applications for contempt were filed before me whereupon order was passed by me directing the authorities to appear before me and bring the results of the petitioners in a sealed envelope. The University authorities however failed to comply with the said order.

( 3 ) ). On or about 1st April, 1996 the Division Bench disposed of the appeal with the observation that the writ petitions should be disposed of expeditiously.

( 4 ) THE main contention of the learned advocate for the University is that the petitioners are beneficiaries of fraud practiced by Buddhadev Hajra Chowdhury, a clerk in the department of Basic Medicine who, it is alleged by one of the petitioners, Sujay Gupta, had demanded a sum of Rs. 15,000/- fromhim for procuring admission of Sujay Gupta to General Surgery Course. On 30th July, September, 1993 a letter was received from Sujay Gupta. The said letter has been annexed to his writ petition being C. O. No. 18869 (W) 1993 and marked as Annexure-'b'.

( 5 ) IN the letter dated 30-9-1993 the petitioner Sujay Gupta had alleged that he was competent in securing his admission to the General Surgery Course and he was not interested in seeking admission through back-door or through bribing. He wanted to know whether his admission was obtained by any illegal means.

( 6 ) ). On the basis of the said letter it has been alleged by the University that the Vice Chancellor had directed an enquiry to be made about the allegation and to take further action, if necessary. On the basis of the above, the Secretary of the Basic Medicine scrutinised the papers and noticed that various manipulations and overwriting in papers appears on the Register as well as in the application forms of some of the candidates. The matter was thereafter brought to the notice of the Vice-Chancellor who directed cancellation of the admission of a number of students including all the writ petitioners herein. A copy of the note which contains the direction of the Vice-Chancellor and other details, have been disclosed and also made Annexure-'c' to the written notes of arguments submitted on behalf of the University.

( 7 ) FURTHER in accordance with the directions of the Vice-Chancellor, an Enquiry Committee was constituted who went into the matter in great details, issued notices to the candidates whose admissions were cancelled. The details of such notices and other relevant particulars will appear from the report, a copy of which has been given to the Court as also to all the other parties.

( 8 ) ). Besides, the writ petitioners t