Judgment 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the Bhim Rao Ambedkar University. 2. Petitioner is the student of B.H.M.S. course. He had taken admission in the B.H.M.S. course in Magadh Homeopathy Medical College & Hospital, Biharshariff. Petitioner without clearing the B.H.M.S. Part-I examination, appeared in the B.H.M.S. Part-ll examination, 1995 held in December, 1997 and cleared it. He also passed Part-Ill B.H.M.S. course. Subsequently, he appeared, vide Roll No. 175 in B.H.M.S. Part-l examination held in the month of April, 2003, but failed in three subjects, namely, Anatomy Theory, Physiology Theory and Homeopathic Pharmacy Theory. Grievance of the petitioner is that since he failed in Part-I examination held in the month of 2003, he appeared in the compartmental examination, but his result is not being published, as such, a direction be issued to the authorities of the University to publish his result of compartmental Part-I B.H.M.S. course, and declare him pass in B.H.M.S. course. 3. Counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the university wherein it has been stated that B.H.M.S. Part-l and Part-ll examination, 2002 held in the month of June, 2003 has been cancelled, as at the time of evaluation of the answer-sheets, mass bungling was detected. It was found that there has been large scale tampering and interpolation in the preparation of the result of the said examination. The Vice Chancellor convened a meeting of the Examination Board and also constituted a High Power Committee of five Deans of the university to enquire into the matter. The Committees examined the original records of the University, submitted a report recommending cancellation of the result of all 74 students of B.H.M.S. Part-I and Part-ll examination. On the basis of this report, a common show cause notice was issued to all 74 candidates and it was also published in the newspapers, only thereafter, the entire examination was cancelled. 4. Considering the fact that entire examination itself has been cancelled, petitioner cannot ask for publication of his result, only because he appeared in the compartmental examination. He will have to appear in all papers of Part-I examination and only when he clears Part-I examination, his result can be published. It is totally false that Petitioner was not given proper notice regarding cancellation of the examination. He had proper notice of cancellation of his result which is apparent from his representation. He will have to appear in all papers of Part-I examination and only when he clears Part-I examination, his result can be published. It is totally false that Petitioner was not given proper notice regarding cancellation of the examination. He had proper notice of cancellation of his result which is apparent from his representation. He appeared in the compartmental examination only when he came to know about cancellation of result. 5. Considering the fact that, petitioners result of compartmental examination cannot be published, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that B.H.M.S. Part-I examination is scheduled to be held in the month of February, 2006 and he may be permitted to appear in the coming examination. 6. In case, the petitioner applies for appearing in the B.H.M.S. Part-I examination, University will accept the fees and forms of the petitioner and allow him to appear in all subjects in the Part-I examination scheduled to be held in the month of February, 2006. 7. Accordingly, this application is disposed of. However, petitioner if appears in all papers of B.H.M.S. Part-I examination and clears all subjects, the University will consider and publish the final result of the petitioner as he has already cleared Part-ll and Part-Ill examinations.