A student cannot be punished for unfair means in an examination that has been legally cancelled.

1. The petitioner was a student of B. Com. (Part I) of the University of Allahabad. He appeared at the examination for it in May, 1982. The examination for the second paper, namely, mathematics was held on May 17, 1982. At this examination the invigilator found that the petitioner was in possession of some unauthorised material. He reported the matter. A few days later, on May 20, 1982, a notice was issued requiring the petitioner to show cause why his result should not be cancelled and why he should not be debarred from appearing at subsequent examination. The petitioner submitted his explanation. The University authorities had constituted a sub-committee to deal with the cases of use of unfair means at examinations. This Committee considered the entire material relating to the petitioner. It came to the conclusion that the petitioner was guilty of using unfair means at the examination. The Committee by an order of Nov. 13, 1982, cancelled the petitioner's result and debarred him from appearing at the subsequent examination of 1983.

2. It appears that the University authorities got news that the second paper of B. Com. (Part I), that is to say, of mathematics, had been leaked out. On this the University authorities cancelled the examination in that paper as a whole, and on May 31, 1982 announced that the candidates will be examined again in the mathematics paper on June 9, 1982.

3. Some students filed a writ petition and obtained an order postponing the examination. The writ petition was ultimately dismissed. The University authorities held the examination of B. Com. (Part I) in the second paper (Mathematics) on July 21, 1982. The petitioner was permitted to appear at that examination.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that since the examination of mathematics paper itself was cancelled by the University authorities, they were not competent to take disciplinary action for use of unfair means at that examination. When the University authorities cancelled the examination as such, it cannot be said that the petitioner had used unfair means at a valid examination of the University.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the University urged that the University had not cancelled the examination of Mathematics paper. The examination in this paper was held, but its result was cancelled, because the examination was unfair in the sense that the question paper had been prematurely leaked out. Since the examination was in fact held, use of unfair means at such an examination could well be taken cognizance of and adequate punishment meted out to the guilty student.

6. S.7 (4) of the U. P. State Universities Act , 1973, provides that the University shall have the power and duty to hold examinations for, and to grant and confer degrees, diplomas and other academic distinctions to and on persons.

7. S.29 contemplates the constitution of an Examination Committee. Sub-section (4) of S.29 confers power on the Examination Committee or its delegatee to "debar an examinee from future examinations of the University, if in its or his opinion, such examinee is guilty of using unfair means at any such examination".

8. It will be seen that the relevant provisions speak of use of unfair means at an examination held by the University. It is implicit in these provisions that an examination should be conducted or held by the University and at such an examination an examinee may be guilty of using unfair means.

9. The examination referred to in these provisions in the examination held or condu