Back
2006 Supreme(All) 1093
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Rakesh Tiwari, J.
Jai Prakash Singh Bhupat Singh
Versus
Registrar, Veer Bahadur Singh, Purvanchal University, Tilak Dhari College
Civil Misc.Writ Petition 4434 of 2005
Decided On : 17 April 2006
Civil Misc. Writ Petition 4434 Of 2005
ANIL TIWARI, B.P.Singh, Yogendra Pati Tripathi,
Fraud vitiates every action, and a student who commits forgery with college staff cannot be a responsible citizen and does not deserve sympathy.
Headnote:
Fraud - Education - [AIR 1990 SC 1075, JT 1990 (2) SC 57, 1990 (1) SCALE 647, (1990) 3 SCC 23, [1990] 2 SCR 273, 1990 (1) UJ 661 (SC), Sanatan Gauda v. Berhampur university and Ors.; (1992) 2 UPLBEC 1063, Tasleem Ullab v. Regional Office, Majhyamik Shiksha Parishad, u. P. Bareilly; Shri Krishnan v. The Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra U. J. SC 1976 page-15; (1990) 2 UPLBEC 1053 Pravesh Kumar Dubey v. University of Kanpur and Anr.] - The court discussed various cases related to educational fraud and emphasized that fraud vitiates every action. It also highlighted that a student who commits forgery with college staff cannot be a responsible citizen and does not deserve sympathy.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner claimed to have passed various examinations and sought a B. Sc. pass certificate, but the university refused, alleging fraud in obtaining the certificates.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner had engaged in fraudulent activities to obtain certificates and concluded that there was no merit in the case.
Issues: The main issue was the petitioner's claim for a B. Sc. pass certificate and the university's refusal based on alleged fraud.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that fraud vitiates every action and that a student who commits forgery with college staff cannot be a responsible citizen and does not deserve sympathy.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed with costs of Rs. 5000, and the authority was allowed to proceed in accordance with the law.
( 1 ) IN view of the office report dated 13. 4. 2006 the service on respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are deemed to he sufficient.
( 2 ) HEARD counsel for the parties and perused the record.
( 3 ) THE case of the petitioner is that after passing High School and Intermediate examination with science subject he was admitted in B. Sc. course in Veer Bahadur Singh Purvanchal Unviersity, jaunpur. It is stated that after passing the B. Sc. final year examination he was admitted in M. Sc. and had passed M. Sc. finally in 1998. Thereafter he appealed for B. Ed. course, which he claims to have passed from the same University in 2000. It is further stated that after passing the B. Ed. course the petitioner was admitted in M. Ed. course 2002-03 and has passed the same from the same University in 2003.
( 4 ) THE grievance of the petitioner is that he is not being issued B. Sc. pass certificate in-spite of the fact that he approached the Registrar of the University many times and that when he approached the Registrar of the University he was informed that he has failed in B. Sc. first year as such he can not be issued having passed B. Sc. degree.
( 5 ) THE counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon the following rulings.
1. , AIR 1990 SC 1075, JT 1990 (2) SC 57 , 1990 (1) SCALE 647, (1990) 3 SCC 23, [1990] 2 SCR 273, 1990 (1) UJ 661 (SC), Sanatan Gauda v. Berhampur university and Ors. ; 2. (1992) 2 UPLBEC 1063, Tasleem Ullab v. Regional Office, Majhyamik Shiksha Parishad, u. P. Bareilly ; 3. Shri Krishnan v. The Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra U. J. SC 1976 page-15; and 4. (1990) 2 UPLBEC 1053 Pravesh Kumar Dubey v. University of Kanpur and Anr.
( 6 ) COUNSEL for the respondents relied upon the averments made in para 4 of the counter affidavit in which it is stated that the petitioner was admitted in B. Sc. 1st year in 1994 in T. D. College, jaunpur which is affiliated to Veer Bahadur Singh Poorvanchal University. The University has no role in so far as the admission of the students is concerned, as the affiliated colleges are to give admission to eligible students on their own. The examination form of the petitioner was sent to the University for B. Sc. Ist year in which he was allotted roll No. 41061, The petitioner appeared in the examination in 1994 and had obtained 274 marks and had failed.
( 7 ) SRI Anil Tiwari. counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioner had got issued pass mark-sheets in collusion with the staff of the collage by making interpolations in the cross-list. On the basis of the aforesaid mark-sheet the petitioner again appeared in B. Sc. IInd year examination from the college. However, his result of B. Sc. IInd year was not declared by the university as he had not passed B. Sc. Ist year examination. The result of the petitioner was therefore shown to be incomplete by the University on account of his failure to pass the B. Sc. Ist year. The petitioner again in collusion with some staff of the college made interpolations in the cross-list of the college and managed to appear in B. Sc. III year showing himself to have passed b. Sc. IId year examination. For the second time also his result was not declared by the university showing incomplete result but again he got issued a pass mark-sheet by the college.
( 8 ) IT is stated that this was apparent from perusal of the cross-list of the college, After obtaining pass certificate of B. Sc. the petitioner changed the college and took admission in another affiliated college of the same University namely. Rastriya Madavidyalaya. Jaunpur. According to the respondents this step was intentional because had he applied for admission in Tilak Dhari college his fraud would have discovered by the Admission Committee by giving admission in m. Sc.
( 9 ) IN paragraphs 7 and 8 of the counter affidavit it has been averred that on the basis of above fraudulent the petitioner got admission in M. Sc. in Rastriya Mahavidyalalya. Jaunpur. After passing the same he ag
