KULDEEP TIWARI, J.(Oral)

1. The instant writ petition impugns the order dated 02.02.2026 (Annexure P-10), passed by the respondent No.1-Vice Chancellor, Pt. B.D. Sharma University of Health Sciences, whereby, acting upon the recommendations of the Board of Discipline, the petitioner, has been expelled with immediate effect and has been debarred from re-admission in respondent university or the college/institution (respondent no.5). She also seeks a direction upon the respondents to declare the result of subject no.4, i.e. Forensic Medicine and Toxicology of 3rd Professional, Part-1 of MBBS, which has been withheld by respondent no.1.

2. Assailing the impugned order, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the same is vitiated by a patent violation of the principles of natural justice and is, on this ground alone, liable to be set aside. It is submitted that prior to the passing of the impugned order, the Vice Chancellor neither afforded the petitioner an opportunity of personal hearing, nor supplied her with a copy of the recommendations of the Board of Discipline, thereby depriving her of an effective opportunity to submit a comprehensive response.

3. On merits as well, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that there exists no cogent, reliable, or legally sustainable evidence establishing the petitioner’s involvement in the alleged misconduct. It is further submitted that the penalty of expulsion, being the severest punishment, is grossly disproportionate to the allegations and the material on record.

4. Per contra, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondents No.1 to 3 and 6, having received an advance copy of the writ petition, vehemently opposes the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioner and defends the impugned order. It is contended that a large-scale examination scam had surfaced and was inquired into in a transparent and unbiased manner. A Fact-Finding Inquiry Committee was initially constituted, and on the basis of its detailed report, a Board of Discipline was subsequently constituted in terms of Clause 7(1)(a) of the Ordinance on Maintenance of Discipline among Students (hereinafter referred to as “the Ordinance”). The Board of Discipline afforded the petitioner and other concerned students an opportunity to file written responses, as well as personal hearings, and only thereafter, the recommendation was made, which constituted the bedrock for imposition of the penalty of expulsion under Clause 4 of the Ordinance.

5. Learned senior counsel further submits that the instant writ petition has been filed with the oblique motive of obstructing the ongoing criminal prosecution arising out of FIR No.25 dated 15.02.2025, registered under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of the IPC and Sections 7A and 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, against one Roshan Lal, clerical staff, and 24 students (including the petitioner).

6. Before adverting to the rival submissions and examining the legality of the impugned order, it is deemed imperative to recapitulate the relevant factual matrix giving rise to the present proceedings.

7. The University received a complaint alleging large-scale irregularities in the conduct and evaluation of M.B.B.S. examinations. Consequently, a Preliminary Inquiry Committee was constituted, which submitted its detailed report on 13.02.2025, highlighting grave irregularities in the answer sheets of 30 students, including the petitioner. The key findings penned down therein were: (i) mismatch between serial numbers of answer books used by candidates and official records; (ii) strong indications of substitution or interchange of answer sheets; and (iii) tracing of a list of 46 missing blank answer sheets, raising concern that the same were illicitly used in the scam.

8. On the basis of the report (supra) and in exercise of powers under Clause 7(1)(a) of the Ordinance, the Vice Chancellor constituted a Board of Discipline to initiate disciplinary proceedings. The