A.N. Varma, B.N. Misra, J. - (1.) We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned standing counsel. In pursuance of the direction of this Court, the learned standing counsel has produced the original record including the answer books of the petitioners and those of the others from whom the petitioner are alleged to have copied or whose answers tallied with those of the petitioners which, according to the respondents furnish proof of use of unfair means.
(2.) It is not necessary to give the facts in detail of each petitioner as the petition is entitled to succeed on a short ground. From the original record produced by the learned standing counsel. It appears that though initially results of the petitioners as well as those of the others whose answers are stated to have tallied with those of the petitioners were cancelled. Subsequently, on a representation by the candidates tied up with the petitioners were declared exonerating them of the Charge of use of unfair means. The facts of the cases of those exonerated by the respondent - Board and of the petitioners are in distinguishable. The points of similarity between the answers of the petitioners and those of the others exonerated by the Board were the same. We refrain that why a distinction should have made in the case of the petitioners. The learned standing counsel was unable to point out any point of distinction between the cases of the petitioners and those of others.
(3.) In the result, the petition succeeds and is allowed. The impugned order cancelling the petitioners results are quashed. The respondents are directed to declare the result of the petitioners of the Intermediate Examination of 1986 and issue a fresh markesheet to the petitioner within one month of the date on which a certified copy of this order is filed before the Secretary to the Board. A copy of this order may be given to the learned counsel for the petitioners on payment of requisite charges within 24 hours. Petition allowed.;