9911796707
TMI Blog1969 (11) TMI 88X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion, hereinafter referred to as the Board, to reconsider the case after giving the petitioner a chance to offer her explanation. The facts are not in dispute and the only question which arises is whether in the circumstances the petitioner was entitled to an opportunity to represent her case before the Board prior to the passing of the impugned order. The relevant facts in brief are these. The petitioner was in 1959-60 session a student of Basant Girls Intermediate College, Varanasi. She appeared at the Intermediate examination in 1960 but failed. She then joined the Government Inter College for Girls at Jaunpur. Her name was sent up for Intermediate examination to be held in 1961 by the Principal. She appeared in the examination but her re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d 2 of the letter will be sent after July 8, 1961. She, however, stated When Km. Chitra Srivastava absented herself for a pretty long period on account of her illness, the position :was explained to her, besides informing her guardian also who was even called to the office and acquainted with the circumstances. At that time, it was possible for her to make good this shortage by her regular attendance. The teacher in Home Science took leave in February, 1961. Chitra was short in attendance in other subjects also, but she made good the shortage by her regular attendance. When, during the days the classes were held, lectures in other subjects were held and the girl attended there, it was, not considered proper to detain her from appearing at ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ily. On appeal, Srivastava and Katju, JJ., allowed the petition, as mentioned earlier. They were of the view that the Board, while cancelling the examination, acted in a quasi-judicial capacity. The Board was by cancelling the examination inflicting a penalty and if opportunity had been given to the petitioner to present her case she might have persuaded the Board not to cancel the examination. The learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. C. B. Aggarwal. contends that the facts are not in dispute and it is further clear that no useful purpose would have been served if the Board had served a show-cause notice on the petitioner. He says that in view of these circumstances it was not necessary for the Board to have issued a show-cause notic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it. Whether it has the power to condone the shortage of lectures is for it, at least in the first instance, to decide. The learned counsel further invites us to say that the possible courses which the petitioner's counsel had outlined before the High Court will not be legal or justified. The petitioner's counsel had pointed out that the Board could have been persuaded to adopt -some of the following courses (1) To accept the explanation of the principal as valid. (2) To condone the shortage of two lectures which the Principal could not condone. The question whether the Board had power to condone shortage was raised in the Board of High School and Intermediate Education Uttar Pradesh Allahabad and others versus G. Vishwanath Naya ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
