KAN SINGH, J.—This is a writ petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution by one Ranjeet Singh challenging the validity of a notification dated 10.8.64, issued by the University of Rajasthan, whereby the University cancelled the examination taken by the petitioner in 1964, and also debarred him from appearing at any subsequent examinations of the University to be held in three succeeding years.

2. The petitioner was a student of the Second Year Three-Degree Course (Science) at the University of Rajasthan. He sat at the Second Year Examination held by the University in April, 1964, at the Bikaner centre. On 6.4.64, the petitioner answered his Mathematics Paper No. 1. His case is that after answering the paper he went to his house, but soon thereafter he was called by the Principal, Doongar College, to his office. Accordingly, the petitioner presented himself before the Principal who then told him that one of the invigilators Shri Jag Mohan Mittal had complained against the petitioner that he had used unfair means at the time of answering the question paper of that day. The petitioner replied that the allegation was completely wrong and he had not used any unfair means at the examination. The petitioner was then allowed to go home. The petitioner asserts that he was never confronted with the invigilator Shri Jag Mohan Mittal and the Principal did not make any inquiry in the matter in the presence of the petitioner. When the results of the Second Year (Science) examination were announced the petitioner found that his result was withheld. On this the petitioner addressed a letter to the Registrar inquiring as to why his result had been withheld. There was no response to his communication, but eventually the Registrar of the University intimated the petitioner about the issuing of the impugned notification by the University. The petitioner then made representations to the University for withdrawing the notification, but without any response.

3. In attacking this notification the petitioner submits that, as the University of Rajasthan is a statutory body and as the Syndicate is the executive body of the University it was bound to act quasi judicially and follow the principles of natural justice before it could take such a drastic action against an examinee. In this regard the petitioner asserted that he was never called upon to meet any charge made against him, nor was he given any opportunity to submit his explanation. He was also not given any opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses whose statements might have been recorded and further, no opportunity to adduce his defence was afforded. In short, his submission is that he has been condemned unheard.

4. The writ petition has been contested by the University. Traversing the averment of the petitioner it was submitted on behalf of the University that on 6.4.61 at 10.00 A.M. when the time of the examination was over and the answer books of the candidates including the petitioner were being collected it was found by Shri Jagmohan Mittal, one of the invigilators who came to collect the answer book of the petitioner, that in the said answer book there was a paper containing full solution of Question No. 8-A of the Question Paper of that day. Shri Mittal then prepared his report about what he had found and asked the petitioner to put his signature thereon, but he fled away. Shri Mittal then submitted his report to the Superintendent of Examinations Shri P.C.Jain. At about 11.45 A.M. the petitioner appeared before Shri P.C. Jain on his own initiative when Shri Jain inquired from the petitioner in the presence of Shri Mittal and Servashri Sahani, Additional superintendent of the Examinations and Gopikishan, Clerk whether the sheet of paper containing the solution was recovered from his answer book by the invigilator Shri Mittal. The petitioner then admitted that this was so, but when he was asked to give his statement in writing he said that this he would be doing after consulting his father

Click Here to Read the rest of this document