Natural justice principles require show cause notices and reasoning in penalty cases; failure to adhere resulted in quashing the impugned decision.

J U D G M E N T

Dated this the 03^rd day of November, 2025 The petitioner is pursuing his MBBS Course at Amala Institute of Medical Sciences, Thrissur. After successfully completing the first three years, petitioner appeared for the final year exam, i.e, the Third Professional MBBS Degree Part II Supplementary Examinations, conducted from 14.05.2025 to 14.07.2025. Sometime later, the college received a mail from the Kerala University of Health Sciences (‘the University’ for short) alleging malpractice during examinations, along with the video grab showing certain students interacting with each other inside the examination hall. The images of those students were marked in the video grab and the suspected students directed to appear before the Malpractices and Lapses Enquiry Committee (hereinafter referred to as 'M&LEC') on 23.08.2025. Accordingly, the petitioner and other students appeared before M&LEC on 23.08.2025. Thereupon, the members of the M&LEC, which included the 3^rd respondent, exhibited the video of the CCTV footage of the examination hall and enquired whether the ‘marked’ students were present. Thereafter, the students present were asked to explain as to what had transpired. According to the petitioner, his explanation that he had only rubbed his hair and had not looked at or interacted with other students, was not accepted. Later, by Ext.P5 communication, it was informed that 2 students of Amala Institute of Medical Sciences, Thrissur had committed malpractice, either by receiving help from other candidates or by giving help to others present inside the examination hall. The students found guilty were imposed with the punishment of cancelling their appearance in the whole examination (all subjects) of the Third Professional MBBS Degree Part-II Regular/Supplementary Examinations May, 2025. The Vice Chancellor accorded sanction for the punitive action recommended by the M&LEC and thereupon, Ext.P5 order dated 19.09.2025 was issued. Although petitioner preferred an appeal against the decision, the same is not being considered. Hence, this writ petition.

2. Adv. Manu Govind, the learned counsel for the petitioner put forth the following arguments to assail Ext.P5;

No copy of the CCTV footage, based on which the students were found to have indulged in malpractice and imposed punishment, is made available to the petitioner. If a candidate is found communicating to another candidate or person available inside or outside the examination hall, warning or expulsion from the examination hall or cancellation of the candidate’s appearance in the particular examination are the punishments prescribed as per Chapter XII, Clause I(A)2 of the Examination Manual. Therefore, the punishment of cancelling the whole examinations imposed on the petitioner is disproportionate to the malpractice alleged against him. The Examination Manual also envisages grant of reasonable opportunity to the student to defend the charge against him. Instead of granting such opportunity to the petitioner, he was compelled to offer an explanation. The petitioner’s action recorded in the video footage though explained, was not taken into consideration. As per Chapter VI, Clause 3(ix) of the Kerala University of Health Sciences First Statutes , 2013, the Governing Council is competent to withdraw permission for a student from appearing for a University examination only for conduct, which in the opinion of the Governing Council, justified the candidate's expulsion. Even then, the proviso to Clause 3(x) mandates grant of opportunity to the candidate concerned to show cause in writing as to why the proposed penalty should not be imposed and if explanation is filed in time, it should be considere