JUDGMENT V.K. Khanna, J. - The petitioner at the relevant time was a student of class B.E. II Year III Semester. On 25.2.1989 when the petitioner was appearing in the paper of Mechanics of Deformable Solids Shri V.K. Agrahari (respondent No. 4) apprehended the petitioner for using unfair means. The matter was reported to the University(respondent No.1) and in pursuance of the report of Shri V.K. Agrahari a charge-sheet was served on the petitioner which is contained in Annexure 5 to the writ petition. In the said charge-sheet it has been mentioned that the objectionable material found with the petitioner at the time of the Examination was a plastic cover over which certain matter was written by hand with pencil. 2. At the admission stage contesting respondent No. 3 had filed a counter-affidavit. The University has produced the original record before us. The present writ petition is thus being disposed of finally in accordance with the Rules of the Court. 3. It has not been disputed before us that from the original record it is clear that the charge levelled against the petitioner was not correct. The real charge levelled against the petitioner was that a hand-written chit was found from his possession at the time of the Examination and the petitioner had snatched that chill from the hands of Shri V.K. Agrahari and swallowed the.same in order to not make available the incriminating evidence which was found against him. The petitioner has not been served with that charge and instead he has been served with the charge which [probably was applicable to other candidates who were found using unfair means i.e. Shri Munish Batra. It has been stated before us that an enquiry was also conducted against Shri Munish Batra but he has already been exonerated by the University. 4. Looking to the entire facts and circumstances of the case we are of the opinion that the petitioner cannot be punished on the basis of the charge levelled and served on him as the petitioner had not used unfair means the way it has been alleged in the charge-sheet. The petitioner is thus not liable to be punished on the basis of that charge. The decision of the University cancelling the Examination of the petitioner for the year 1988 and debarring him from the examination of 1989 is liable to be quashed. The petitioner is thus not liable to be punished on the basis of that charge. The decision of the University cancelling the Examination of the petitioner for the year 1988 and debarring him from the examination of 1989 is liable to be quashed. The petitioner under the interim order passed by this court has appeared in IV and V Semester Examinations. The respondents will declare his result of these examination and will also permit him to appear in the subsequent examinations in accordance with the provisions of the statutes and ordinances applicable to the petitioner's case. 5. For the reason stated above, the present writ petition is allowed to the extent indicated above. However, looking to the facts and circumstances of the case the parties shall bear their own costs. 6. A certified copy of the order shall be given to the learned counsel for the parties within three days on payment of usual charges.