- (1.) The petitioner was caught using unfair-means in the examination in question and consequently his results have been cancelled. He has further been debarred from appearing in the future examinations on the ground that this use of unfair-means dis-entitles him to appear in the future examination. Sri Vivek Varma contends that the University has the authority and power to pass such an order of debarment and the contention of the petitioner that it is in excess of the powers of the University is incorrect.
(2.) Sri Varma has produced the norms for deciding the case of unfair-means and awarding punishment to such candidate as decided by the University in the Notification/resolution dated 15.5.2008. The clauses as contained in the said norms do indicate that the power is possessed by the University for debarring a candidate if any material has been found in possession of the candidate or has been collected nearby his seat and there is a report of the examiner of the use of such material. The words used in Clause 4 are that a candidate "may" be further debarred for one year.
(3.) As against the said clause, Clause No. 5 indicates that if such material was either swallowed by the candidate or sought to be destroyed by him then the candidate has to be debarred for the following year.;