ANITA SINGH Vs. UNIVERSITY OF ALLAHABAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Ravi Kant, Senior Advocate, alongwith Sri Santosh Yadav, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Sri Gautam Baghel, learned Counsel for the respondent-University. The petitioner appeared in IVth Semester of M.A. (Hindi Examination), 2012. It is the case of the respondents that while the petitioner was appearing in 17th paper of M.A. (Hindi) of IVth Semester Examination 2012 on 10.5.2013, two hand-written pages (paper chits) were found from the possession of the petitioner. UFM form was got signed from the petitioner by the Head Invigilator and the answer book of the petitioner alongwith unauthorised material was signed by the Flying Squad. It appears that a second copy has been given to the petitioner. Thereafter a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner on 20.5.2013, stating therein that on 10.5.2013, when you were appearing in 17th paper of M.A. (Hindi) of IVth Semester Examination 2012, while you were found using unauthorised material/intending to use such material caught by the Invigilator with two hand written pages in your possession. The petitioner filed reply to the show cause notice on 30.5.2013 wherein it was stated that on 10.5.2013, when she was appearing in the examination of 17th paper of M.A. (Hindi) of IVth Semester Examination 2012, a paper which was lying, has been lifted by her. The Invigilator has told her that said paper belongs to her and on being confused and pressurised, she filled UFM Form and the second copy has been provided to her. Thereafter, the impugned order dated 26.7.2013 has been passed whereby the result of the petitioner of M.A. IV Semester Second Examination, 2012-2013 has been cancelled and the petitioner has been debarred from the corresponding (and any other) Examination of 2013-2014 under Clause 1 of University Ordinance. The impugned order is referred hereinbelow:-

(2.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that in the show cause notice it has only been stated that two hand written papers were found in the possession of the petitioner and they have been used/intended to be used by the petitioner. In the show cause, it has not been stated that the question No. 1 of Khand 'Ka' on page 1 of the answer book has been transcribed from the unauthorised material (handwritten chit/portion of the chit). Further, it is not clear from the show cause that from which place two hand written papers were found and, therefore, the observation made in this regard, in the impugned order is unjustified inasmuch as the order has been passed in violation of principles of natural justice without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Thus, the order impugned is vitiated and is liable to be set aside.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the respondents submitted that the petitioner in the reply herself admitted that the paper, which was lying, has been lifted by her and in the UFM Form also it has been admitted that the papers were found from her possession. In the show cause notice, it has been categorically stated that the unauthorised material has been found from the possession of the petitioner, which has been used by the petitioner. He further submitted that the finding recorded in the impugned order that the answer of Question No. 1 of Khand 'Ka' at page 1 of the answer book has been word by word transcribed from the caught unauthorised material, has not been disputed in any of the paragraphs of the writ petition. The impugned order has been passed after giving fullest opportunity to the petitioner and is based on the materials on record. Therefore, no interference is called for.