G. B. PATNAIK, J. ( 1 ) THESE two writ applications involve common question of law and were, therefore, heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. ( 2 ) PETITIONERS in O. J. C. No. 6109 of 1992 had appeared at the Annual Higher Secondary Examination of 1992 from Sarala Mahavidyalaya Centre. While the results were declared, the Controller of Examinations having notified all students from the said Centre to have failed as the Chairman of the Council has cancelled the Examination of English Papers-I and II and M. I. L. and it has further been indicated in the said notification that no re-examination would be conducted in those examination papers and zero mark will be awarded, they have approached this Court. The said notification of the Council of Higher Secondary Education, Orissa, dated 27th of June, 1992, has been annexed as Annexure-1. Petitioners in O. J. C. No. 6199 of 1992 had appeared at the Annual Higher Secondary Examination of 1992 from Cuttack College, Nayabazar, Centre and by the self-same notification dated 27th of June, 1992, issued by the Council of Higher Secondary Education, the results in respect of students appearing from the Centre having been cancelled in respect of Political Science Paper-I, Economics, Paper-II and Biology Paper-II and it has further been indicated in the said notification that no re-examination would be conducted in those examination papers and zero mark will be awarded, they have approached this Court. The said notification dated 27th of June, 1992, has been annexed to the writ petition as Annexure-1. The main stand of the petitioners in both the writ applications is that without following the principles of natural justice and without giving any show cause, the results of the students have been cancelled, which is illegal and invalid and should be set aside by this Court. The main stand of the petitioners in both the writ applications is that without following the principles of natural justice and without giving any show cause, the results of the students have been cancelled, which is illegal and invalid and should be set aside by this Court. ( 3 ) THE Council of Higher Secondary Education through its Deputy Controller of Examinations has filed a counter-affidavit indicating therein that in course of the conduct of examination, the Flying Squad visited the different centres and in respect of the centres from which the petitioners in both the writ applications had appeared submitted reports stating therein that the students had involved themselves in mass malpractice and in consideration of the said reports of the Flying Squad, the appropriate authority has taken the decision to cancel the results and to award zero mark and not to hold the examination in question afresh. ( 4 ) ). It has been the settled position of law that in case of a mass malpractice, question of following the principles of natural justice does not arise, as it is not a case of charge against any individual candidate. The Council appoints Flying Squad and the members of the Flying Squad visit different centres all of a sudden without any prior programme and submit their report with regard to the prevailing condition in the examination hall at the time of their visiting the centre and if on those materials the competent authority is satisfied that the students of a particular centre have indulged in large scale malpractice, then the competent authority can decide to cancel the results of the examination papers of the candidates of that centre. In view of the allegations made in the writ applications, we had called upon the counsel appearing for the Council of Higher Secondary Education to produce before us the relevant materials on the basis of which the appropriate authority was satisfied about large-scale malpractice by the students for which the impugned decision has been taken and in pursuance of the same, the relevant records have been produced before us. In respect of Cuttack College, Nayabazar, Centre the report of the Flying Squad clearly indicates that when the examination centre was inspected by them on 14-4-1992 in the second sitting where Biology Paper-II was the subject of examination, they found that the condition and atmosphere that prevailed inside the examination hall and the examination premises was such that nobody could say it to be an examination centre. They also indicated that profuse number of copy materials had been kept on the stairsteps as well as on the windows and the students were freely talking among themselves sitting close to each other and as soon as the Flying Squad members arrived, signal was given to the examinees inside about their arrival. It was also indicated that the invigilators expressed their helplessness to control the candidates and to prevent them from whispering and talking and the Flying Squad in their ultimate conclusion suggested that such College should not be selected to conduct examination as no norms of the examination rules have been obeyed. So far as the other Centre, namely Sarala Mahavidyalaya Centre at Rahama is concerned, the reports of the Flying Squads on different dates were also produced before us. Those reports indicate that there was outside interference and mass copying and violence in the examination hall/premises and even though police forces were requisitioned, but police did not reach the place. The reports further indicate that there was public interference and the examination had not been conducted properly and when the member of the Flying Squad arrived they found large number of outsiders were scaling over the boundary wall and were supplying incriminating materials notwithstanding the members of the Flying Squad preventing them from doing so. The invigilators were mute observers and the Centre Superintendent was also helpless. The Centre Superintendent himself had also reported about the violence as well as malpractice practised by the examinees in a large scale. On going through the mass of materials produced by the Counsel for the Council of Higher Secondary Education, we have no hesitation to come to the conclusion that the students from the two examination centres did indulge in mass malpractice and, therefore, the decision has been taken rightly to scratch the examination papers in those centres and to award zero mark. We see no infirmity with the decision taken by the authorities in scratching the examination papers and directing award of zero mark and not to hold the examination afresh. In our considered opinion, the decision taken by the Council of Higher Secondary Education does not require any interference by this Court. ( 5 ) ). In course of hearing of the writ application, the learned counsel for the petitioners wanted to urge that even when students from a particular centre indulged in large-scale malpractice, but there are some good students who suffer and, therefore, the Court should issue certain direction in that respect. We really are not in a position to protect such innocent students once they appeared from the centre in question. Indulging in malpractice in the examination has gone to such an extent that it deserves special consideration by the authorities who are in charge of conduct of examination as well as by all concerned. But very often allegations are made with regard to the appointment of Supervisors, Observers and Flying Squad to the effect that out of jealousy and animosity, these committees give false reports on the basis of which the authorities are persuaded to take an action to the gross detriment of the students community. Thus Court has the occasion to examine such matter in the case of Lahara Begum v. Board of Secondary Education, Orissa, (1987) Cut LT Supppl 401, and some guidelines have been indicated therein. We would like, however, to add a few words in that respect for the guidance of the authorities who are in the help of affairs of conducting examination. In the matter of selection of centre to hold examination, the competent authority should decide at least 3 months before examination and should select such places (school or college) which they think to be fit to hold the examination. We are aware of the fact that the number of examinees every year increases and the concerned authorities find it difficult to accommodate so many examinees, but that painful task has to be undertaken by the authorities after due deliberation and the selection should be such where there may not be easy access to the institution in question where the examination is being held, so that by putting some check at the entry point, malpractice can be checked to a great extent. Further, once a decision is taken with regard to the centre from which the students from different colleges would appear, that decision should not be changed unless there is good and sufficient reason. Change of centre often causes great harassment to the candidates particularly in the matter of getting accommodation at the place where the examination would be held. The next important aspect is with regard to the appointment of supervisors and observers. In selecting supervisors and observers, the authorities of the Council of Higher Secondary Education are required to take extra precaution and it is preferable that senior professors or Readers of Government Colleges should be appointed from a distant place who would have no axe to grind against the centre from which the examinees are appearing or against the examinees themselves. The apprehension in the mind of the examinees as well as the institutions should not be there that the observers and supervisors are acting with an attitude of bias. Appointing observers and supervisors from a distant place may involve some expenses, but that is preferable than to have such supervisors and observers from nearby colleges who might have sufficient reasons to act with an attitude of bias. While selecting supervisors and observers their reputation regarding honesty and integrity should be borne in mind. With these observations, both the writ applications are dismissed being devoid of merits. We, however, make no order as to costs. B. PANIGRAHI, J. I agree. Applications dismissed. .