- (1.) THE petitioners have filed this joint writ petition challenging the order passed by the Board of Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Ajmer by which their examinations are cancelled on account of mass copying.
(2.) THE petitioners appeared for the examination of Senior Secondary School (Science), 2004 held in the month of March 2004, as regular students of Govt. Senior Secondary School, Tapukara, Tehsil Tijara, District Alwar. during the course of examination the examiner has made the complaint regarding mass copying. THE matter was examined and after following due process of law the petitioners' examination for 2004 has been cancelled. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order dated 25.7.2004 passed by the respondent No. 2 the petitioners preferred the writ petition on the ground that all the petitioner having brilliant academic careers and most of the petitioners have secured more than 60% marks. The allegations are alleged against the mass copying against the 50 students out of them result of 11 students has been declared whereas the petitioners' numbering 39 have been cancelled. The action of the respondents is absolutely contrary to the provisions of law and also in violation of the principle of natural justice as well as discriminatory. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the respondent No. 2 issued the notice dated 17.6.2004 to all the petitioners. In this show cause notice three charges have been levelled but all three charges have not been substantiated by any evidence whatsoever. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the respondent No. 2 with the ulterior motive and adopting discriminatory attitude has cancelled the petitioners' examination whereas the benefit of doubt is given to 11 students. It is further submitted that there are allegations of mass copying against 50 students out of which 11 students have been picked up, this shows discriminatory attitude of respondent No. 2. No reason has been assigned as to why 39 petitioners have been left and the result of 39 students has no been declared.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners also submits that this is not a case of respondents that the petitioners were caught red handed by invigilator or by flying squad. Since they have not been caught red handed, no material evidence is available with the respondent No. 2 regarding mass copying. Since there is no intrinsic evidence to prove charges, cancellation of examination is wrong and not permissible under law as held by Allahabad High Court. Learned counsel for the petitioners referred the case of Kumari Sandhya Sharma vs. Board of High School & Intermediate Education, U.P. Allahabad (1), wherein Division Bench of Allahabad High Court has held that cancellation of examination of petitioner, a candidate, on ground of use of unfair means-Charge based merely on report of examiner that answer to a question, given by petitioner was strikingly similar with answers or other candidates. The High Court on examination of answer books found that there was no intrinsic evidence to prove charge and order cancelling examination of petitioner on mere suspicion could not be sustained. In support of his submissions learned counsel for the petitioners placed reliance on the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarat Kumar Panigrahi vs. the Secy. Board of Secondary Education, Orissa (2). The Hon'ble Supreme Court has opined that the Courts can certainly examine whether the decision making process was reasonable, rationale and not arbitrary on the facts and circumstances in each case. There has been no infirmity in the decision making process by the Commissioner. It is further held that the impugned action initiated by the Commission in cancelling the examination of respondents No. 1 and debarring him is well founded and calls for no interference. ;