ORDER : Heard learned advocate Mr.Y.H. Motiramani for the petitioner, learned advocate Mr.A.D. Oza for the respondent Nos.1 and 2 and learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr.Dhawan Jayswal for the respondent Nos.3 and 4. 2. Learned advocate Mr.Motiramani for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is aggrieved by the action of the respondent – Board for not issuing the show-cause notice to the petitioner for the action taken against the petitioner as per the impugned order dated 6th November, 2020. 3. The brief facts of the case are as under : 3.1 The petitioner was studying at St. Xaviers’ School, Hansol, Ahmedabad in 12 Standard - Science Stream. The petitioner states that the petitioner had appeared in High Secondary — Science Stream examination in March 2020 vide seat no.B100176 from Rajasthan High School Centre. The petitioner had obtained 319 marks out of total 700 marks. The detailed breakup of marks of petitioner is mentioned hereinbelow : Name of Subject Total Marks Marks obtained Grade English (F.L.) 100 55 C1 Chemistry 100 20 E2 Chemistry Practical 50 38 B1 Physics 100 25 E1 Physics Practical 50 37 B1 Biology 100 34 D Biology Practical 50 29 C1 Computer 100 51 C1 Computer Practical 50 30 C1 Total 700 319 The passing marks are 34/100 and 17/50. Hence the petitioner had to retake the examination in Chemistry and Physics. 3.2 It is the case of the petitioner that the respondent no.1 Board thereafter conducted supplementary examinations for Science Stream in the month of August 2020. The petitioner had appeared in supplementary examination for Chemistry and Physics held on 26.08.2020 and 27.08.2020. There was no issue in Chemistry examination held on 26.08.2020. On 27.08.2020 the petitioner’s examination centre was Convent English School, Opp. AEC, Jantanagar, Amraiwadi, Anmedabad. As the petitioner and his father were not familiar with Amraiwadi locality, they took assistance of Google Maps App in petitioner’s mobile and reached the exam centre at Convent English School, Amraiwadi on 27.08.2020. Through oversight the petitioner had kept the mobile handset in his pocket. The petitioner’s examination of Physics was schedule during noon session from 3:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. on 27.08.2020. At around 4:15 p.m. the mobile handset, kept in petitioner’s pocket rang. Thus the petitioner was immediately caught by attending supervisor and the mobile-phone was recovered from the petitioner. Through oversight the petitioner had kept the mobile handset in his pocket. The petitioner’s examination of Physics was schedule during noon session from 3:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. on 27.08.2020. At around 4:15 p.m. the mobile handset, kept in petitioner’s pocket rang. Thus the petitioner was immediately caught by attending supervisor and the mobile-phone was recovered from the petitioner. Thereafter the petitioner continued with his examination till 6:00 p.m. 3.3 An intimation to this effect was given to Amraivadi Police Station and FIR bearing no.1191004200730/2020 dated 27.08.2020 (copy at Annexure-D) was lodged at Amraiwadi Police Station and the petitioner was booked u/s.188 of Indian Penal Code. As the petitioner was minor at the relevant point of time, the petitioner’s father was also issued notice about registration of the FIR and the petitioner was apprehended and taken to Amraiwadi Police Station. 3.4 The petitioner completed 18 years of age on 16.10.2020 and attained majority. Thereafter the petitioner’s father was telephonically intimated to attend the office of respondent no.3 -District Education Officer, Ahmedabad on 29.10.2020 from St. Xaviers’ High Secondary School, Ahmedabad. Accordingly the petitioner and his father visited the office of respondent no.3 on 29.10.2020. At that time the Examination Supervisor and Principal of Convent English School were also present. The petitioner, alongwith the Examination Supervisor and Principal of Convent English School were made to speak to a higher rank officer via Google Meet Application from the office of respondent no.3 for about 4-5 minutes with distorted internet connectivity. The petitioner was thereafter asked to make a written representation then and thereby the officers present in the office of respondent no.3, which was submitted by the petitioner. 3.5 It is the case of the petitioner that thereafter, the impugned decision was taken on 6.11.2020 and the petitioner is supplied a copy thereof through his school. 4. Learned advocate Mr.Motiramani submitted that the impugned decision is rendered without any show cause notice by the respondent no.2, the petitioner is compelled to approach this Honourable Court invoking writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 4.1 It was therefore, submitted by learned advocate Mr.Motiramani that if the petitioner is given an opportunity of hearing by issuing showcause notice by the respondent – Board, it would be in the interest of justice as there is violation of principles of natural justice committed by the respondent – Board. 5. 4.1 It was therefore, submitted by learned advocate Mr.Motiramani that if the petitioner is given an opportunity of hearing by issuing showcause notice by the respondent – Board, it would be in the interest of justice as there is violation of principles of natural justice committed by the respondent – Board. 5. On the other hand, learned advocate Mr.Oza submitted that the respondent – Board has given an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner by calling upon the petitioner to appear through the video conference meeting at the office of the District Education Officer. 5.1 Learned advocate Mr.Oza relied upon the following averments made in the affidavit-inreply filed on behalf of the respondent – Board : “6. It is submitted that the petitioner appeared in the Board Examination of Std. 12t (Science Stream) held in March - 2020. In_ said examination, the petitioner failed in two subjects i.e., Chemistry and Physics. Therefore, the petitioner appeared in the supplementary examination held in August - 2020. The exam of Physics subject was scheduled on 27.08.2020 and in middle of said examination the petitioner was found in possession of handset (mobile phone). However, the petitioner was permitted to complete his examination. Thereafter, the necessary Rojkams were drawn. It is necessary to submit that the petitioner has categorically admitted in his Statement dated 27.08.2020 that though the repeated instructions with regards to not to bring mobile phone and other material were given by the Building Conductor and Supervisor, the mobile phone in working condition was caught from me during the examination. The copies of Rojkams drawn on 27.08.2020 and Statement of the petitioner is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure - R/1 Collectively. Due to outbreak of COVID-19 virus, the respondent Board decided to hold the online hearing of the students who were found committing irregularities (unfair means) during the supplementary Board Examination. The concerned District Education Officers vide communication dated 20.10.2020 of the respondent Board were informed about the necessary procedure to be followed for such online hearing. A copy of communication dated 20.10.2020 is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure - R/2. Accordingly, the petitioner remained present with his father on 29.10.2020 and was reasonably heard through Google Meet application. Hence, there is no violation of principles of natural justice. A copy of communication dated 20.10.2020 is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure - R/2. Accordingly, the petitioner remained present with his father on 29.10.2020 and was reasonably heard through Google Meet application. Hence, there is no violation of principles of natural justice. In view of the facts that the petitioner was given reasonable Opportunity of representing his case through hearing the averments with regards to issuance of show-cause notice are misconceived. 7. It is denied that the network was distorted or there was lack of network connectivity. The petitioner is failed to substantiate that there was a network issue. Thus, the petitioner was given the reasonable and sufficient opportunity of being heard by the respondent Board before the order dated o6.11.2020 was passed. The respondent Board has not received any written representation of the petitioner as stated in para no. 3.4. It is submitted that the statements of the petitioner, Building Conductor and Supervisor were recorded before the District Education Officer. The copies of such Statements are annexed herewith and marked as Annexure — R/3 Collectively. 8. It is an admitted position that the petitioner was in possession of the mobile phone during the examination. It is necessary to submit that the necessary instructions related to examination were mentioned in the Hall Ticket (page no. 19). rt is evident from such instructions that keeping a mobile during the examination would amount to irregularity. In fact, the petitioner in his Statement dated 27.08.2020 has categorically admitted that the repeated instructions to not to keep mobile phone with the student during examination were given. However, the petitioner was found in possession of the mobile phone and thus, as per the instructions mentioned in the Hall Ticket as well as the printed of irregularities stated in the punishment table framed under Regulation 51 of the Gujarat Secondary and Higher Secondary Certificate Examination Regulations, the possession of mobile phone during the examination itself would be irregularity which entail the punishment viz. cancellation of entire result of concerned exam, debar from appearing in the subsequent two examination and to file a police case as envisaged at Sr. no. 31 in the said punishment table. Thus, the respondent Board has rightly imposed _ the punishment. A copy of the punishment table is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure - R/4. cancellation of entire result of concerned exam, debar from appearing in the subsequent two examination and to file a police case as envisaged at Sr. no. 31 in the said punishment table. Thus, the respondent Board has rightly imposed _ the punishment. A copy of the punishment table is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure - R/4. Under such circumstances, there is no substance in the submission of the petitioner that there is no allegation of misconduct of cheating. In fact, in case of cheating separate punishment is prescribed. 5.2 It was therefore, submitted that by issuance of show-cause notice to the petitioner and hearing the petitioner would be an empty formality in view of the admitted fact that the petitioner was having a mobile phone during the examination and giving a second chance to the petitioner to represent his case would amount to misplaced sympathy. 5.3 Learned advocate Mr.A.D. Oza has also relied upon the following decisions : (i) Board of High School & Intermediate Education, U.P., Allahabad & Anr. vs. Bangleshwar Prasad & Anr., (1963) 3 SCR 767 ; (ii) Maharashtra State Board of Secondary & Higher Secondary Education vs. K.S. Gandhi & Ors., (1991) 2 SCC 716 ; (iii) Controller of Examination vs. G.S. Sunder and another, 1992 (2) GLH 140 ; (iv) Central Board of Secondary Education vs. Vineeta Mahajan and another, 1994 (1) GLH 71 ; (v) Gujarat Secondary Education Board vs. Sunny Dharampalsingh Chaudhary, Minor, through father, 2000 (2) GLH 90 (para no.2 to 6); (vi) Sardar Patel University vs. Minal R. Jogi and Anr., 2000 (2) GLH, 199 (para no.4); (vii) Director (Studies), Dr.Ambedkar Institute of Hotel Management, Nutrition & Catering Technology, Chandigarh and others vs. Vaibhav Singh Chauhan, (2009) 1 SCC 59 , (para no.17 to 21 & 27); (viii) The Saurashtra University, Through Registrar & Anr. vs. Gautambhai Nareshbhai Chaudhari & Anr., Letters Patent Appeal No.1351 of 2012; (ix) Bhavinkumar Ganpatbhai Padhiyar vs. Sardar Patel University, SCA NO.6374 OF 2020 (Order dated 17.08.2020). 6. Having heard the learned advocates for the respective parties and having gone through the materials on record, it appears that the respondent – Board has not issued show-cause notice to the petitioner which is not in dispute. 6. Having heard the learned advocates for the respective parties and having gone through the materials on record, it appears that the respondent – Board has not issued show-cause notice to the petitioner which is not in dispute. Therefore, only on this short ground, the petition deserves to be allowed and the impugned order dated 6th November, 2020 is quashed and set aside and the respondent – Board is directed to issue a show-cause notice to the petitioner for the action to be taken against the petitioner for the complaint with regard to having mobile phone with the petitioner during examination held on 27th August, 2020. 6.1 Such show-cause notice shall be issued to the petitioner within a period of one week from today, and the hearing shall be given to the petitioner pursuant to such show-cause notice, within a period of two weeks from the date of issuance of show-cause notice. In addition to the issuance of the show-cause notice, the petitioner is also directed to go personally to the office of the respondent No.1 – Board on 29th December, 2021 and to obtain the copy of the show-cause notice and thereafter submit the reply within a week thereafter, on or before 5th January, 2022. 6.2 The respondent – Board shall thereafter provide a personal hearing to the petitioner on or before 13th January, 2022. It is further directed that the respondent – Board to pass an order on or before 20th January, 2022 in accordance with law. 6.3 The entitlement of the petitioner to appear in the examination to be held in the month of March, 2022 would depend upon the decision of the respondent – Board, after considering the representation as well as the submission which may be made by the petitioner during the course of personal hearing. 7. It is clarified that the aforesaid directions are issued considerations the fact that the hearing was given by the respondent – Board through video conference on account of the Covid- 19 pandemic and therefore, in the peculiar facts of the case the aforesaid directions are issued. 8. With the aforesaid directions, the petition is disposed of. Notice is discharged.