Syndicate, the final authority functions in a quasi-judicial capacity.

ORDER :- The petitioner appeared in September 1961 for the Second B. E. (Integrated course) under the first respondent University. On 9-11-1961, the Registrar of the University sent a notice to the petitioner stating that the Chief Superintendent, University Examinations, Thyagaraja College of Engineering, Madurai, reported that he had reasons to suspect that pages 12 to 15 and 28 to 32 of the answerbook were brought from outside and inserted by him in the examination and in support of it the Chief Superintendent relied that (1) There were folds at the middle of these pages, (2) the handwriting of the petitioner showed extreme calmness and (3) some of the matter he had written in those pages were irrelevant to the questions asked in the examination. In the circumstances, the Registrar, by a notice, called upon the petitioner to submit by return of post his explanation as to why disciplinary action should not be taken against him for having violated R. 7 of the pamphlet "Instructions to the Candidates" issued to him along with the hall ticket. The petitioner received the notice on 13-11-1961 and sent his explanation on 17-11-1961. On 30-12-1961 the Syndicate Committee on discipline read (1) the letter dated 17-9-1961 from the Chief Superintendent, University Examinations, Thyagaraja College of Engineering, Madurai, enclosing and forwarding the answer paper of the candidate with the Register No. 358 in Physics II and (2) the petitioners explanation and "Resolved that the examination taken by the candidate be cancelled, that he be debarred from appearing for the next two examinations held by the University and that the candidate be not permitted to undergo any course of studies in this University during this period." The records sent up to this Court relating to this matter show an endorsement dated 30-12-1961, made by the Convener of the syndicate Committee on discipline :

"The explanation of the candidate is unacceptable--the examination taken by the candidate may be cancelled and the candidate debarred from the next two examinations".

On 9th January, the syndicate of the University, as its proceedings held on that day, recorded,

"Read letter dated 12-9-1961, from the Chief Superintendent, University Examinations, Thyagaraja College of Engineering, Madurai, forwarding the answer paper of the candidate with register No. 358 in Physics II-B suspected case of malpractice, also the explanation of the candidate together with the recommendation thereon of the Syndicate committee on discipline, welfare of students, etc.

Resolved that the examination taken by the candidate be cancelled, that he be debarred from appearing for the next two examinations held by the University and that the candidate be not permitted to undergo any course of studies in this University during this period." Pursuant to this resolution the University sent to the petitioner the order dated 24-1-1962 :

"He is informed that his appearance for the second B. E. (Integrated) examination, September 1961 has been cancelled, and that he has been debarred for any examination of this University for the next two examinations. He will not be permitted to undergo any course of studies in this university during this period of rustication. He will be permitted to appear for the Second B. E. (Integrated) examination only in April 1963." The petitioner asks this Court under Art. 226 of the Constitution to quash this order.

2. The main ground urged for the petitioner is that neither the proceedings resulting in nor the resolution of the Syndicate nor the order of the University communicated to him disclosed what the Syndicates finding was on the charge levelled against him. It is common ground that the final authority in matters of discipline is vested in the Syndicate and that no particular procedure to be followed in dealing with cases of discipline has been prescribed either by the statutory provisions or regulations made thereunder. Even so, the contention is that the Syn