VICE-CHANCELLOR C. M. U. KANPUR v. ABHAY KUMAR TRIPATHI
2006-09-13
AJOY NATH RAY, ASHOK BHUSHAN
body2006
DigiLaw.ai
JUDGMENT By the Court—We are in respectful disagreement with the reasoning given and the order passed by the Hon’ble Single Judge on 27.7.2006 allowing the writ petition of the respondent-writ petitioner. 2. The allegation against him was that when taking the Part III (Economic Papers) in the B.A. Part III examination, one printed page was found in his possession which was related to the subject which was being examined. 3. In these cases, the rules lay down a detailed procedure as to how the Invigilator has to note down from where exactly the material was recovered from the student and the student’s signature is also to be taken; if the student refuses to sign, such refusal is to be contemporaneously recorded. These things were not followed at all and the material was sent to the Committee along with the signature of the Invigilator on the requisite form which was practically unfilled. 4. A notice was sent to the writ petitioner. He denied the receipt of the first notice but answered the duplicate. Both the said answer and the way the writ petition has been cast leave no manner of doubt that the student never made so bold as to deny that there was anything in his possession or to affirm that everybody was lying and he was made the victim of the respondent’s employees; this is not the stand; he takes the technical stand of the form being not properly filled up and the University officials not going about it in the way prescribed. Possession is not really denied, but only the use of the material. 5. Under the rules any attempt at use of unfair means is punishable; when somebody carries the relevant printed material into the examination hall, it certainly crosses the stage of mere preparation for using unfair means and becomes an attempt; then and at that stage the University is entitled to deal with the student who did not act with perfect propriety. The writ Court should not exercise its discretion in these cases. 6. As such, the appeal is allowed. The impugned order is set aside; the writ petition is dismissed. Appeal Allowed. ———