ORDER M.L. Bhat, J. - The petitioners who are 33 in number, Pray for writ of certiorari for quashing the order dated 5-5-90 passed by respondent No. 2 and seek a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to permit the petitioners to appear in the Lekhpal examination of the year 1989-90 which was to commence from 13-6-90. This Court has passed an interim order dated 16-7-90 permitting the petitioners to appear in the said examination which was to commence on 18-7-90 and the said order was subject to further orders which might be passed by this Court. In pursuance of the said order the petitioners are said to have appeared in the examination and their prayer is now that their result may be declared. 2. Pleadings of the parties are complete. Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged, therefore, learned counsel for the parties requested for disposal of the writ petition finally in accordance with the Rules of the Court. This writ petition is, therefore, being disposed of at the admission stage, finally. 3. In order to understand thy controversy, it is necessary to give brief resume of the facts as set out in the pleadings of the parties. 4. It is avered in the writ petition that there was a Government scheme of employing unemployed persons. Framed in 1973-74. A large number of untrained Lekhpals were given training. Thereafter, they were to be sent for regular training. The petitioners are said to have worked on the post of Lekhpal for more than one year during the period 1980-83. The petitioners were not paid salary for the work done by them. Some Lekhpals are said to have filed a writ petition in this Court and in the Lucknow Bench of this Court. In pursuance of those decisions the Government proposed to regularise the services of untrained Lekhpals. A G.O. dated 15-1-86 was issued. The said order directed the District Magistrate for sending various categories of untrained Lekhpals for regular training. The said Government order is annexed as Annexure-1 to the writ petition. The Lekhpals who have completed one year's service between 13-9-76 up to 1-6-83 were entitled to be sent for training. The petitioners are said to have completed one year service and they applied for being sent for the training. The said Government order is annexed as Annexure-1 to the writ petition. The Lekhpals who have completed one year's service between 13-9-76 up to 1-6-83 were entitled to be sent for training. The petitioners are said to have completed one year service and they applied for being sent for the training. Respondent No. 3 after considering the claims of the petitioners is said to have asked the District Magistrate, Mirzapur/Agra for admitting the petitioners in Government Lekhpal Training Centre Agra for training. Copies of the order are annexed to the writ petition. After satisfying himself respondent No. 3 is said to have asked respondent No. 4 that the petitioners were fully eligible in every respect to receive training. Copy of this order is also placed on the record. Since March 1989 the petitioners are said to be getting training as regular candidates in Government Lekhpal Training Centre Agra, They are said to have paid training fee month by month and completed their training for one year. After that the impugned order was issued whereby the name of the petitioners was struck off from the roll of the college by an order of the District Magistrate. The said order is challenged on the ground that it is violative of principles of natural justice and passed behind the back of the petitioners. The petitioners submit that they were struck off from the roll because in the opinion of the respondents they were unpaid Lekhpals. Cancellation of their admission on this ground is illegal and arbitrary. The petitioners have worked for one year which is duly certified and were, eligible to appear in the examination. The impugned order was passed without notice to the petitioners and was against the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. In their counter the respondents have stated that the petitioners have got admission in the Lekhpal Training College by fraud and on forged documents about which enquiry has been set up. The eligibility of the petitioners to appear in the examination is also questioned and it is stated that the orders on which the petitioners rely are outcome of the fraud and misrepresentations. The officers who had helped the petitioners in forging the documents are being prosecuted. A criminal case was filed against them. The petitioners have filed a rejoinder affidavit also. The officers who had helped the petitioners in forging the documents are being prosecuted. A criminal case was filed against them. The petitioners have filed a rejoinder affidavit also. It is stated that the petitioners have completed necessary formalities and have been issued certificate by the District Magistrate, Mirzapur and Deputy Land Management Commissioner. The petitioners have been admitted in the college and they have completed one year training course. The respondents have levelled acts of fraud and forgery against 32 petitioners as regards petitioner No. 33 it is stated that he has also completed his training along with the other petitioners. No notice was given to the petitioners for deletion of their names from the college's roll. All other assertions raised in the counter-affidavit are refuted and denied. 6. Learned counsel for the parties have been heard. The impugned order dated 5-5-90 is based on some enquiry which is alleged to have been conducted in respect of the eligibility of 32 petitioners. However, the proceedings of that enquiry or its report has not been placed on record. It is not known as to when that enquiry was held and who had initiated the enquiry. At any rate so called enquiry which is referred to in the impugned order was not held in presence of the petitioners. They had no notice that enquiry was initiated and they were not required to file their reply to the said alleged enquiry. It is also admitted that at the back of 4he petitioners 32 petitioners were struck off from the roll of the college on the ground of allegation of forgery and fraud allegedly, committed by them. The allegation against the petitioners was serious and grave, therefore whether on the basis of the impugned order the petitioners can be denied the right to appear in the examination after completing one year training, is a moot question to be considered in this writ petition. 7. The petitioners have been permitted by various authorities to seek admission in the Lekhpal Training College. The duration of the training was one year. 7. The petitioners have been permitted by various authorities to seek admission in the Lekhpal Training College. The duration of the training was one year. It was necessary that at the time of their admission to the training course their eligibility must have been examined and if after some time there was any doubt about their eligibility to seek admission in the training course it was necessary for the respondents to issue show cause notice to the petitioners before any order of expulsion or striking out their names from the roll of the college was issued. The action taken by the respondents with-regard to striking out the names of 32 petitioners from the roll is therefore violative of principles of natural justice. As regards petitioner No. 33 respondents have raised no dispute. Before debarring the petitioners from appearing in the examination or before striking out their names from the roll of the college, it was imperative for the respondents to hear the petitioners and to ask them to file their explanation with regard to proposed action which was taken against them in pursuance of Annexure 4. Such an order cannot be sustained in view of the guarantees available to the citizen under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The respondents action is neither fair nor just. It is in breach of the principles of natural justice and is to be struck down on this short point. 8. The petitioners have appeared in the examination under the orders of the Court. Only their result is to be declared now. So far as petitioner No. 33 is concerned their is no allegation against him of any fraud or forgery. His result needs to be declared without any enquiry. So far as petitioner Nos. 1 to 32 are concerned if there is any allegation of fraud or cheating or forgery against them, that is directed to be enquired into within a specified time and if they are exonerated of the charges of forgery or fraud levelled against them by the respondents in seeking the admission, then their result also is to be declared. 9. Accordingly, impugned order dated 5- 5-90 is quashed as being unconstitutional and violative of principles of natural justice. 9. Accordingly, impugned order dated 5- 5-90 is quashed as being unconstitutional and violative of principles of natural justice. The respondents are directed by a writ of mandamus to declare the result of petitioner No. 33 within two weeks from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this judgment before them. With regard to petitioner Nos. 1 to 32, the respondents may, if so advised, held an enquiry in their presence in respect of their eligibility to appear in the examination which would include their eligibility to seek admission in the Lekhpals Training College at Agra and in this enquiry petitioner Nos. I to 32 shall be associated and they shall be given fair chance of being heard and adducing such evidence in defence as may be wished to be adduced by these petitioners. The process of enquiry against petitioner Nos. 1 to 32 shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this judgment before the respondents. In case the charge levelled against petitioner Nos. 1 to 32 are not proved against the said petitioners their result shall be declared within two weeks from the date of conclusion of the said enquiry. If the respondents do not choose to hold any enquiry about the eligibility of the petitioners to seek admission, as directed in this judgment, then the result of petitioner Nos. 1 to 32 also shall be declared within a reasonable them. 10. The writ petition succeeds and is allowed to the extent indicated above.