MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT AT JABALBUR BENCH
A.M. Khanwilkar, K.K. Trivedi, JJ.
Pratibha Singh Ku. - Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh - Respondent
W.P. No. 20342-2013
Decided On : 11-04-2014
Judgment:
A.M. Khanwilkar, C.J.
1. By this common judgment, we propose to dispose of all the abovenoted writ petitions together as the same involve similar points for consideration and challenge the common orders passed by the Madhya Pradesh Professional Examination Board (hereinafter referred to as 'the Board'). Each of these petitions, essentially, challenge the decision of the Board vide orders dated 9th October, 2013 and 6th December, 2013 respectively. By the said orders, the Board cancelled the entrance examination results of 415 candidates of Dental and Medical Admission Test (hereafter referred to as the 'entrance test' for the sake of brevity) in two lots of 345 and 70 candidates vide order dated 9th October, 2013 and 6th December, 2013 respectively, for the reasons recorded in the said orders.
2. As a consequence, the admissions granted to the concerned candidates in the Medical Colleges on the basis of the said examination results, which stood annulled, came to be cancelled by the respective Medical Colleges. As a result, even these consequential orders are subject matter of challenge. We may mention that in some of the writ petitions, the reliefs claimed are loosely worded. In the interest of justice, however, we hold that the intention of each of the petitioners is not only to challenge the action and decision of the Board, but, also the consequential order passed by the concerned Medical College cancelling their admission to medical course.
3. The background in which the impugned orders were passed by the Board can be briefly stated as under:-
(i) The Board initiated steps to conduct Pre-Medical Test (PMT) examination pursuant to the request made by the Medical Education Department, Government of Madhya Pradesh, in that behalf vide letter dated 10th May, 2013. An Activity Chart, Rule Book, Examination Programme was then approved by the Chairman of the Board on 20th May, 2013. Thereafter, an advertisement was issued in newspapers having wide circulation on 22nd May, 2013. The Online Forms were invited between 22nd May, 2013 to 21st June, 2013 and the date of examination was scheduled on 7th July, 2013. The Board then appointed Coordinating Centers in 14 cities on 27th May, 2013. Other logistical arrangements were made by the Board for conduct of free and fair entrance examination for admission to professional courses. The candidates were to be allocated roll numbers and examination centers on 30th June, 2013. As per the Activity Chart, finalized by the Chairman of the Board, the Test Admit Cards, which were to be generated contemporaneously with computerised allocation of roll numbers and examination centers to the students and uploaded on 30th June, 2013 itself. However, that was done on 3rd July, 2013 by the concerned officials 12 of the Board.
(ii) The complaint regarding gross irregularities and unfair means in the conduct of examination was received by the Director General of Police on 6th July, 2013. Acting upon the said complaint and the reports appearing in the local newspapers about the conspiracy hatched for resorting to unfair means by large number of the candidates with the assistance of candidates coming from other States, the Indore Crime Branch moved into action and arrested about 20 suspects. However, the Board continued with the process of conducting entrance examinations on 7th July, 2013. On the same day, F.I.R. was registered at Police Station, Rajendra Nagar, Indore, bearing Crime No. 539/2013 mentioning about the involvement of large number of candidates having indulged in unfair means during the entrance examination. After registration of the FIR, the Crime Branch made inquiries with the officials of the Board and sought certain information. A written communication in that behalf was also received by the officials of the Board dated 8th July, 2013 from the Crime Branch. The information, as sought by the Crime Branch, was provided by the officials of the Board on 12th July, 2013.
(iii) Notwithstandi
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
A valid signature must be in the candidate's own handwriting, as emphasized by the General Clauses Act and relevant case law.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.