Back
1991 Supreme(Ori) 42
High Court Of Orissa
D. P. MOHAPATRA, D. M. PATNAIK
SUSHMARANI DAS - Appellant
Versus
BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, ORISSA - Respondent
O. J. C. 5021 Of 1990
Decided On : 04/02/1991
A.S.Naidu, C.A.RAO, P.MOHANTY, S.C.Dash
The Examination Committee has the power to cancel an examination on the ground of mass malpractice, but it does not have the power to direct that there will be no further examination in the cancelled papers and that the results of the candidates will be processed taking the marks in the cancelled papers as zero.
Headnote:
CERTIFIED TEACHERS' EXAMINATION (C. T. EXAMINATION) AND ELEMENTARY TEACHERS' EXAMINATION (E. T. EXAMINATION) - CANCELLATION - MASS MALPRACTICE - POWER OF EXAMINATION COMMITTEE - FAIRNESS AND PROPRIETY - JUDICIAL REVIEW - CANCELLATION OF EXAMINATION PAPERS - NO FURTHER EXAMINATION - INCOMPETENCE OF EXAMINATION COMMITTEE - DIRECTION TO PERMIT CANDIDATES TO APPEAR IN ENSUING EXAMINATION WITHOUT FEES.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioners, candidates for the C. T. / E. T. Examination, 1990, challenged the Board of Secondary Education, Orissa's (Board) decision to cancel the examination at the S. K. Academy Centre due to alleged mass malpractice. The Board relied on reports from the flying squad and other officers indicating rampant malpractice during the examination.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the Examination Committee had sufficient material to conclude that the examination at the Centre was not conducted as per rules and regulations. The reports submitted by the officers of the flying squad, countersigned by the Centre Superintendent, indicated large-scale malpractice and outside interference. The Court held that the decision to cancel the examination was not illegal, irrational, arbitrary, or guided by extraneous or irrelevant considerations.
Issues: 1. Whether the Examination Committee had the power to cancel the examination on the ground of mass malpractice. 2. Whether the Examination Committee acted fairly and properly in taking the decision to cancel the examination. 3. Whether the Examination Committee had the power to direct that there would be no further examination in the cancelled papers and that the results of the candidates would be processed taking the marks in the cancelled papers as zero.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Examination Committee had the power to cancel the examination on the ground of mass malpractice, as per Regulation 17 (b) of Chapter XD of the Board's Regulations. 2. The Examination Committee acted fairly and properly in taking the decision to cancel the examination, as it had sufficient material to conclude that the examination was not conducted as per rules and regulations. 3. The Examination Committee did not have the power to direct that there would be no further examination in the cancelled papers and that the results of the candidates would be processed taking the marks in the cancelled papers as zero, as this was not specifically provided for in the Regulations.
Final Decision: The Court quashed the part of the Board's decision directing that there would be no further examination in the cancelled papers and that the results of the candidates would be processed taking the marks in the cancelled papers as zero. The Court directed the Board to permit the candidates who appeared in the said examination from the S. K. Academy Centre to appear in the ensuing C. T. / E. T. Examination without paying any examination fees.
D. P. MOHAPATRA, J.
( 1 ) THE common grievance raised by the petitioners in these writ petitions is against the action of the Board of Secondary Education, Orissa (opp. party No. 1) in cancelling the Certified Teachers' Examination (C. T. Examination) and Elementary Teachers' Examination (E. T. Examination) held in April, 1990 at the Sreekrishna Academy Centre where they were appearing. Though 63 examinees have filed these writ petitions, in all 308 candidates are stated to have suffered the consequence of the impugned action of the Board. The petitioners have prayed for issue of a writ of mandamus quashing the decision of the Examination Committee of the Board as per the notification dated 23-10-91 (Annexure-1) and directing the opp. parties to restore the results of the candidates of the C. T. /s. T. Examination, 1990 of S. K. Academy Centre or in the alternative directing the Board to hold another Examination forthwith without collection of examination fees. The material portion of the impugned order as per Annexure-1 reads as follows :"after perusal of the reports received from the Centre Superintendent / Deputy Centre Superintendents / Observers / Flying Squad / Special Squad and careful consideration of all available documents regarding conduct of the C. T. /e. T. Examination, 1990 the Examination Committee is satisfied that examination at the following centre has not been conducted as per rules and regulations of the Board. Hence in pursuance of the Board' Regulations, C. T. / E. T. Examination, 1990 is cancelled wholly as noted below against the Centre. There shall be no further, examination in the cancelled papers and results of the affected candidates shall be processed taking the marks of the cancelled papers as 'zoro'. Sl. No. Name of the Centre roll Nos. Papers. 1. S. K. Academy, Jagatsinghpur, Cuttack c. T. 16p063, 23p113, 25p079, 27p111, 28p002-014, 016-019, 021-023, 025-096, 099-108, 110-123,125-171, 173-246, 248-252, 254-300, 302-303. 29po70, 271, 276, 280, 389, 393, 396, 409, 424. E. T. RE 001, 002, 004 005. All Theory papers (Paper I to IX Cancelled)xx xx xx"
( 2 ) THE material facts as evident from the averments in the writ petitions and the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners are that the petitioners appeared at the 1990 Annual Examination as private candidates since the institutions in which they were regular students were not recognised by the State Govt. The Centre Superintendent who is Headmaster of a High School conducted the examination which, according to the petitioners, was in accordance with the Rules
and Regulations formulated by the Board. The flying squad and supervisors appointed by the Board had visited the S. K. Academy centre. When the result of the examination was declared it was found from the result-sheet as per Annexure-2 that the result of four candidates of the centre bearing Nos. 095, 102, 173 and 244 were withheld on the ground of mal-practice and results of the two candidates bearing Nos. 003 and 236 were withheld for other reasons, but subsequently the petitioners learnt that the result in all theory papers at the centre was cancelled by the impugned order (Annexure-1 ). The petitioners assail the order mainly on the grounds that (a) it is not a speaking order; (b) the Board is not competent to direct that there shall be no further examination in the cancelled papers and results of the affected candidates shall be processed taking the marks of the cancelled papers as 0' (zero); (c) since the result sheet showed that the results of four candidates were withheld on the ground of mal-practice there was no reason or justification to cancel the results of all students; and (d) that the impugned decision is vitiated due to non-compliance with the principle of natural justice inasmuch as no notice was issued to the Centre Superintendent before taking the decision. The petitioners however conceded the power of the Board and its examination Committee to cencel the enti
