JUDGMENT K.C. Agrawal and V.K. Khanna, JJ. - The petitioner was a regular student of Raja Harpal Singh Intermediate College, Singramau, district. Jaunpur. He filled in the form for appearing in the High School Examination of the year 1980 as a regular candidate.from the said College. The from was accepted by the U. P. Board of High School and Intermediate Education. The petitioner was allotted 507420 as the Roll number. The centre from which the petitioner was required to appear was Jai Hind Intermediate College Tezi Bazar, district Jaunpur. 2. On March, 17, 1980, the petitioner alleges that he sent an application to the Board for change of the centre on the ground that as the said centre was 25 Kilometers from the place of his residents, the same be changed to Bajraag Intermediate College, Ghansbyampur, district Jaunpur. On April 5,1980 the petitioner enquired about the change and found from the Jai Hind Intermediate College that intimation had been received by that centre acceding to the request for the change. The petitioner, thereafter, appeared of om the Bajrang Intermediate College. His result was, however, not declared. He received an intimation on 13.10.1980 to show cause why action be not taken against him for having not appeared at the examination from the appointed centre. The petitioner sent a reply disputing the change of having not appeared from the centre nominated by the Board. On 10.2.1981 the Board cancelled the result of the petitioner of the High School Examination of the year 1980 and further debarred him from appearing in the next examination, that is, in 1981. 3. Being aggrieved, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. 4. A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents asserting that neither was any application for change of centre filed by the petitioner nor was any permission given to him by the Board. The allegations made were that the petitioner fraudulently obtained the order for the change of the centre and, as such the petitioner had committed breach of the Regulations which entitled the Board to take action against him for the same. 5. The petitioner filed a rejoinder as well as a supplementary affidavit for the purpose of providing that he had been intimated by the Principal of the Bajrang Intermediate College, Ghanshyampur, for appearing at the examination through that centre. 6. 5. The petitioner filed a rejoinder as well as a supplementary affidavit for the purpose of providing that he had been intimated by the Principal of the Bajrang Intermediate College, Ghanshyampur, for appearing at the examination through that centre. 6. After hearing counsel for the parties, we are of opinion that the Board's order dated 10.2.1981 contained in Annexure 5 to the writ petition, is illegal and is liable to be quashed. The charge against the petitioner was that of appealing from the centre which had not been allotted to him. The decision of the Board is based on suspicion against the petitioner. There was no evidence or any circumstances which could justify the taking of the view for procuring change of the centre fraudulently or illegally against the petitioner. The order of the Board is based on a suspicion entertained by the Examination Committee. On the suspicion that the petitioner was guilty of having procured the order fraudulently, his result of the year 1980 could not be cancelled. It may be noted in this connection is that Bajrang Intermediate College, Ghanshyampur, district. Jaunpur, was also one of the approved centres from which students appeared at the High School Examination. Nothing could be shown by the State Counsel that unfair means had been adopted by the students at this centre at a large scale. No action was taken in this regard, if the change by the petitioner had been procured fraudulently that must have been done with the purpose to get a chance of using unfair menans at this centre. Nothing was found in that regard by the Examination Committee. In this view of the matter we are of the opinion that the Boards order cancelling the result of the petitioner and further baring him from appearing in the High School Examination of the year 1981 is liable to be set aside. 7. In Krishna Mohan v. Board of High School and Intermediate Education U.P. Allahabad, [AIR 1979 All. 592] a similar view was taken by a Division Bench of this Court. This decision has been followed by another Division Bench. 8. For the reasons given above, the writ petition succeeds and is allowed. The order of the Board dated 10 2.1981 is quashed. The Board is directed to declare the result of the petitioner forthwith.