K.N. Singh, J. - (1.) On 24-5-1985 this court required the respondent to file a counter affidavit by 15th July, 1986. No counter affidavit has been filed as yet, in this petition and in the connected writ petition of smt. Kankesh Pathak.
(2.) We have heard the counsel for the parties and we are disposing of the writ petition at the admission stage itself, in accordance with the rules of the court. The petitioner appeared in the 1982 High School Examination conducted by the Board of High School and Intermediate Education, U.P. The petitioner's result was with-held charge-sheet was issued to the petitioner calling upon here to show cause as to why her examination be out not cancelled on account of having used unfair means in the examination. The petitioner submitted a reply to the show cause notice refuting the charges and also appeared before the sub committee constituted by the Board for purposes of enquiry on October 12, 1983. Thereafter, the petitioner's result was declared and show was shown to have passed the examination. Again on 5-6-1984 the Board of High School and Intermediate Education issued the impugned notice to the petitioner calling upon her to explain why proceedings be not taken against her for using unfair means in the High School Examination 1983. Aggrieved, the petitioner has challenged validity of the notice by means of this petition. The petitioner filed the present writ petition and questioned the right of the respondent to issue second show cause notice to the petitioner. The petitioner has asserted that her reply to the first show cause notice was satisfactory and the committee which held enquiry appears to have been satisfied with the petitioner's explanation and as such she was absolved of the charges and her result was declared Now, the second show-cause notice was not justified. Since no counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent, the petitioner's assertion in this respect remained un-controverted. It is, thus, clear that the respondent was satisfied that the petitioner has not used any unfair means. The Board has further failed to show any reason for issued of a second show-cause notice. Precisely, in similar circumstances three Division Benches to this court have taken the view that it is not open to the Board of High School and Intermediate Education to issue a second show-cause notice or to punish the student on second show-cause notice. Reference may be made to the case of Kumari Shalini Rastogi v. Board of High School and Intermediate Education U.P., 1985 UPLBEC 164. and Kumari Praiibha Tandon v. Board of High School and Intermediate Education U.P., Writ Petition No. 4388 of 1585 decided on 1-5-1988). and again Mrs. Kusum Lata v. Board of High School and Intermediate Education, Writ Petition No. 8753 of 1985 decided on August 16, 1985. In all these cases in almost identional circumstances second show-cause notice was quashed. Following the aforementioned cases which are binding on us we hold that the impugned notice dated 5th June, 1984 is illegal and is liable to be quashed.
(3.) In the result we allow the petition and quash the notice 5th June, 184 and direct the respondent not to take any proceedings against the petitioner in pursuance thereof. Petition allowed.;