Sinha, J. - (1.)These are six matters in which the facts are similar and there is a common point of law involved. They have been heard together, and in view of what has happened before me it is unnecessary to deal with them separately and they are being disposed of by a common order.
(2.)Ench of these applications has been made by a candidate appearing in the University examinations held by the University of Calcutta, for the year 1956. The candidate concerned had completed his or her examination, but when the results were published, these candidates found the letters R. A. against their respective roll numbers in the result sheet, meaning thereby "Reported against". What happened was that the examiners had reported against them to the Head examiner of having been guilty of malpractice at the said examination and the Head examiner in turn had reported to the Controller of examinations. These candidates were not the only examinees who wera reported against. A total of 411 cases were reported. Before I proceed further, it is necessary to set out the relevant regulations which govern the procedure in such matters. This is to be found in Ch. XXV, and the relevant regulations are (v) and (vi) set out below :
"(v) There shall be one Examination Board for the I.A. and I.Sc. examinations consisting of- (a) The Vice-Chancellor, Chairman. (b) The Head Examiners in the various subjects. (c) Pour members appointed by the Syndicate of whom two at least shall be members of the Syndicate. Of these four, two shall belong to the Faculty of Arts and two to the Faculty of Science, The functions of the Examination Board shall be- (a) To consider the results and modify them, if necessary in accordance with the principles contained in the University Regulations or laid down by the Syndicate, (b) To consider all cases of breaches of discipline arising out of the examinations. (c) To forward the results to the Syndicate for publication. The Statement made to the Syndicate shall contain confidential information on the change made by the Examination Board and the reasons for the change. (vi) The proceedings of the Board shall be subject to confirmation" by the Syndicate. The Syndicate shall not have the power to modify the results but may refer them back to the Board for reconsideration."

(3.)I shall now proceed to state as to what actually happened in these cases. The Board of Examiners is an unwieldy body, and it is not possible for them as such to investigate all complaints. So, the Board appointed a sub-committee to go into the matter. The sub-committee appears to have taken great pains to investigate the cases of breaches of discipline arising out of the examinations. So far as these six candidates are concerned, they were notified that on receipt of a report against the candidate concerning breach of discipline in the above examination held in 1956 the case had been placed before a sub-committee and the candidate was asked to appear before it, upon a particular date. No particulars were given of the breach of discipline with which the candidate was charged with. On the specified date, the candidate appeared before the sub-committee and was heard. There is direct conflict of testimony as to what exactly happened at the hearing. The candidates state that they were merely asked questions and in some cases asked to write out certain answers. According to them, the charges against them were never disclosed. The Controller of Examinations admits that there were no written charge sheets, but he affirms that the candidates were verbally told of the charges against them and given an opportunity of meeting the charges. Unfortunately, this statement is verified as true to information received from his office records, but the nature of the record has not been disclosed. At the hearing. I was informed that the reference is to the report of the sub-committee, a copy of which is annexed to the affidavit in opposition affirmed by the Controller. There is no mention of this fact in the report anywhere. Nor, has the Controller any personal knowledge, as he was not present at the meetings of the sub-committee. Thus, I cannot attach any importance to his statement in 'this behalf.