- (1.) Heard learned Counsel for the Petitioner and also learned Standing Counsel, appearing for the Respondents.
(2.) In this case, counter and rejoinder affidavits have been filed and the original records have been placed before me. This is a fit case which can be disposed of finally at the stage of admission itself. Therefore, I am proceeding to decide it finally.
(3.) The Petitioner appeared in the Intermediate Examination of 1990 from Lalauli Inter College, Lalauli, Fatehpur and the roll number allotted to him was 269787. From the record it appears that the charge against the Petitioner was that he has been guilty of mass copying, therefore, he was called before the Principal along with others and his statement was recorded. In his statement he has clearly stated that he had not copied, as alleged against him. It is averred in the chargesheet that the Petitioner has copied question No. 3-Kha of IIIrd Paper of Mathematics. Learned Standing Counsel states that the mistakes found in the answer book of the Petitioner are similar with other students. No doubt, the petition has not been very happily drafted. The entire records have been produced before me and, therefore, technicality of not making a proper prayer shall not stand in the way of the Petitioner. In paragraph 10 of the Writ Petition it has specifically averred as under: 10. That surprisingly enough, the Petitioner came to know that 4 persons namely Dhirendra Singh (Roll No. 269762), Jeet Bahadur Singh (Roll No. 269771), Mahadeo Singh (Roll No. 269780) and Pankaj Singh Kushwaha (Roll No. 269792) have been declared as successful and have been discharged from the allegations and charges levelled against them. In the counter-affidavit, this paragraph 10 of the Writ Petition has not been denied and the averments in reply made therein are deliberate with a view not to give clear reply to the assertions made in paragraph 10 of the Writ Petition. Under the circumstances the records of Roll Nos. 269762, 269771, 269780, and 269792 were produced before me. I am conscious that this Court is not sitting in appeal. The Nistaran Committee is comprised of responsible persons and, therefore, the decision of the said committee cannot normally be questioned except, mainly on the ground of arbitrariness.;