DIPANKAR DATTA, J. - (1.) FMA 212 of 2009 and FMA 516 of 2009 are intra-court writ appeals directed against the judgment and order dated April 25, 2008 passed on W.P. 21719(W) of 2007 (Subhamoy Singha Roy v. Jadavpur University & ors.). It was disposed of with the following directions: " *** The petition succeeds. The executive council resolution of May 16, 2007 is set aside to the extent it applies to the petitioner. But it will be open to the University to begin the process afresh or otherwise adopt a procedure to assess the matter by affording adequate opportunity to the petitioner to present and urge his defence. Nothing in this judgment should be read as having in any manner exonerated the petitioner of the charge of plagiarism or any of the shades of it. Since the respondent no. 11 has filed his independent proceedings, it is not necessary to go into his contention that in the University not traversing the averments in the affidavit filed on his behalf in the present proceedings, the eleventh respondent has to be given the benefit that has been conferred on the petitioner. It will, however, be open to the eleventh respondent to rely on this order in his independent proceedings. The same courtesy cannot be extended to the eighth, ninth and tenth respondents for they ought to have discovered that some mischief was afoot before allowing the dissertations to progress to submission. The considerations that would apply in the case of the supervisors, particularly the common guide, would be entirely different as this petition has been assessed on the petitioner's case and the views expressed here have to be read thus. The observation that the order passed in favour of the petitioner cannot, in this context, be availed of by the supervisors should also not prejudice their independent petitions."
(2.) Reference to independent proceedings initiated by the respondent no. 11, as found in the aforesaid extract, is a writ petition, registered as W.P. 2403(W) of 2008, presented by a Samit Pahari (for short SP, hereafter). By an order of the coordinate Bench dated July 1, 2010, such writ petition was directed to be heard along with the two appeals.
(3.) We have heard the appeals and the writ petition at considerable length and propose to dispose of the same by this common judgment and order.;