SUNITA AGARWAL, J. - (1.) HEARD Shri Amitabh Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri A.B.L. Gaur, Learned senior advocate assisted by Shri Saurabh Gaur, learned counsel for the respondent -University namely respondent no. 2 and 3.
(2.) THE writ petition has been filed challenging communication dated 21.08.2013 issued by the Controller of Examination informing the petitioner that he had used unfair means and was caught by Flying Squad with Two chits, which were used in answering the question no. 2 from page no. 1 to 5 of the answer book of Economics. It was further stated that the observation of the Unfair Means Committee is that the unauthorised material recovered from the possession of the petitioner is in his own hand writing and has been used. As such, as per Clause 1.6 B (i), the Committee resolved for cancellation of the result of the candidate of the examination for the year 2012 -13 and debarment from the corresponding (and any other) Examination 2013 -14. By order dated 18.09.2013, this court directed the learned counsel for the respondent -University to produce the entire original records relating to use of unfair means by the petitioner. Today, record has been produced before the court. A perusal of the record indicates that there is a form signed by the petitioner, invigilator and Central Superintendent of the Examination Centre which shows that the petitioner was caught by Flying Squad. A charge -sheet? was issued to the petitioner on 11.05.2013. The petitioner submitted reply dated 18.05.2013. Thereafter, a show cause notice dated 28.06.2013 was issued informing the petitioner as to why action be not taken against him for use of unfair means. The record further indicates that a? communication letter no. 06/1412/2013 dated 21.08.2013 was sent to the petitioner through registered post signed by three persons, the letter does not contain even the designation of persons who had signed the same.
(3.) MOST striking part of the record produced by the University is that another letter no. 06/1412/2013 dated 21.08.2013 was issued under the signature of Controller of Examination of University addressed to the petitioner . It may be noted that contents of both the letters are one and the same. This fact shows that only communication was sent to the petitioner about the punishment inflicted upon him. Learned counsel for the respondent -University has failed to show from the record that there is any resolution of the Unfair Means Committee which is authorised to take decision under the Unfair Means (Ordinances) of the University. A perusal of the ordinances indicates that Clause 1.4, as contained in Chapter XXVIII? of the Ordinance provides that punishment prescribed in the Ordinances shall be awarded by a Committee, not less than five teachers appointed by the Examination Committee or by the Vice Chancellor acting on behalf of the Examination Committee. The Quoram of this Committee shall be three members.;