Hon'ble RATHORE, J. - (1.) THIS writ petition has been filed by the petitioners with the prayer that the respondents be directed to declare their result of Senior Secondary Examination (Hum.), 2009.
(2.) ALL the petitioners are regular students of 12th Class (Senior Secondary) of Indira Gandhi Balika Niketan Senior Secondary School, Ardawata, Tehsil Chirawa, District Jhunjhunu. The Senior Secondary Examination (Hum.), 2009 had commenced from 12.03.2009. The petitioners were allotted Center (No.15156) Indira Gandhi Balika Niketan Senior Secondary School, Ardawata. The result of Senior Secondary School Examination, 2009 was declared by respondents on 10.06.2009. But the result of the petitioners was withheld. Thereafter, the respondents had sent letters to petitioners on 6th and 7th July, 2009 mentioning that they have adopted unfair means in two papers of the examination namely, English (Compulsory) and History Second. The petitioners were asked to appear personally on 14.07.2009, at 11.00 am. In pursuance of the said letters the petitioners, alongwith their parents/guardians, appeared before the respondents and filed their written explanations, wherein they denied the allegations levelled against them. Subsequently, on 24.07.2009, the respondents declared the remaining result of Senior Secondary Examination, 2009, which had been withheld on the earlier occasion. But so far as the petitioners are concerned, their result of Senior Secondary Examination, 2009 was cancelled. The case of the petitioners is that the allegations levelled against them are all of different nature and only on the basis of presumption and doubt, it has been said that the petitioners have adopted unfair means. In fact, the respondents themselves are not sure and specific about the manner in which unfair means was used by the petitioners. Further, it is submitted that it is only on the basis of the report of the examiner that the respondents have not declared the result of the petitioners. The allegation against the petitioners of using unfair means is wholly vague and false. It is also submitted that the allegations about the answers of the petitioners being same as that of the other students of the center is baseless. The counsel for the petitioners has submitted that some of the students like Archana has a good academic record and the allegation, on the basis of the report of the examiner, levelled against her is totally false. Therefore, it is submitted that the action of the respondents in cancelling the result of the petitioners of Senior Secondary Examination, 2009 is illegal, arbitrary and not sustainable in law. On the other hand, the respondent Board has contested the writ petition, by way of filing reply and has submitted that all the fifteen petitioners had appeared in Senior Secondary Examination, 2009 at Indira Gandhi Balika Niketan Senior Secondary School, Ardawata and the code of the Center was 3017. Further, it is stated that during the assessment of the answers books, the examiners of History Second and English (Compulsory) papers found that unfair means had been used by the students during the examination at the above center and as such report was given by them. The -natter was then placed before the Result Committee on 29.05.2009 and the result of the petitioners was withheld. The respondent Board had called for the sitting arrangement of the students at the examination center. Later on the students who had appeared at the aforesaid center, including the petitioners, were issued memos of charge and asked to submit their explanations by 12th to 15th of July, 2009. They were also informed that in case they do not admit the allegations then they should appear before the Enquiry Officer, in the Board office, on the dates mentioned in the memos i.e. from 13th to 17th July, 2009. In all, 117 students were issued charge-sheet out of the total 149 who had appeared at the center and their result was earlier withheld. All the petitioners submitted their explanations and also appeared before the Enquiry Officer in the Board office. After detail enquiry, it was found that charges against some of the students in English (Compulsory) paper were not proved beyond doubt. Therefore, they were given the benefit and as such their result was declared. The experts, after an enquiry, found that answers to the questions in History Second paper were dictated to the students at the Center. One student namely, Anju (Roll No. 1533653) was charged for using unfair means in both the papers i.e. History Second and English (Compulsory). The answers of another student, with Roll No.l533654, in English (Compulsory) paper were found similar to that of the student Anju (Roll No. 1533653). But during the course of hearing, this charge was not substantiated and therefore, the result of the student with Roll No.1533654 was declared. However, the student with Roll No.1533653 was found to have used unfair means in History Second paper and as such her examination was cancelled. Likewise, the examination of all the petitioners were cancelled because the charges of unfair means have been found to be proved against them. In the last, it has been submitted by the counsel for the respondent Board that it is incorrect to say that only on the basis of presumption and doubt that the examination of the petitioners have been cancelled. In fact, the allegations have been substantiated and after giving opportunity of personal hearing that the examination of the petitioners have been cancelled, on the report of Experts.
(3.) 1 have given my anxious and thoughtful consideration to the submissions made by the counsel for the rival parties and perused the material on record, particularly the one placed by the respondent Board alongwith the reply. At the outset, it would be relevant to note here the provisions of law and the instructions/directions issued by the respondent Board to the Superintendents of the Examination Centres as well as the Examiners. The enactment with regard to unfair means was promulgated in State of Rajasthan in the year 1992 and the Act is called Rajasthan Public Examination (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 1992. The relevant provisions, for the purpose of present controversy, are under Section 2 (c), which gives the definition of 'unfair means' as under:- "2(c) "unfairmeans" in relation to an examination while answering question in a public examination, means the unauthorised help from any person, or from any material written, recorded or printed, in any form whatsoever or the use of any unauthorised telephonic, wireless or electronic or other instrument or gadget." Section 3 lays down the prohibition for using unfair means as under:- "3. Prohibition of use of unfair means:- No person shall use unfair means at any public examination." The Act of 1992 is applicable, as per the Schedule of the Act, to any examination conducted by the Board of Secondary Examination under the Rajasthan Secondary Examination Act, 1957. The respondent Board had issued Anudesh/directions to all the Superintendents of Centre of Examination for the year 2009. The relevant directions, published in the booklet, are in Article 21.3 (iii) which are as follows:- ...[VERNACULAR TEXT OMMITED]... ;