9911796707
TMI Blog1962 (8) TMI 115X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re he had appeared for the High School examination, calling upon him to appear before a Sub-Committee to answer the charge of having used unfair means in English, Mathematics and Hindi papers. Accordingly, he appeared before the said Sub-Committee. A charge was given to him and his explanation was obtained on the said charge. This charge was based on the fact that in Hindi 3rd paper set at the said examination, the respondent had given wrong answers to Question No. 4 in precisely the same form in which the said answers had been given by a candidate whose Roll No. was 94733. The respondent's Roll No. was 94734. The respondent was shown the identical wrong answers to the said Question which were found in the two papers, and he was asked to explain about the said identity of the wrong answers. He admitted that the wrong answers appeared to be identical, but he denied that he had used any unfair means. The Sub-Committee however, was not satisfied with the explanation and reported that both the respondent and the candidate whose Roll No. was 94733 had used unfair means. As a result of the report made by the Sub-Committee, the first appellant passed an order cancelling the results of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uch, is liable to be quashed by the High Court in exercise of its high prerogative jurisdiction to issue a writ under Art. 226. 5. In the present case, the High Court has found that the conclusion of the enquiry Committee that the respondent had copied either from the answer book of the candidate bearing Roll No. 94733 or from a common source, was not supported by any evidence. In coming to this conclusion, the High Court has assumed that the charge against the respondent was that he had copied from the candidate bearing Roll No. 94733. Having made this assumption, the High Court has observed that there was no charge against the respondent that he connived in the act of copying by the other candidate from his answer-book, and it has added that there is no evidence in proof of such connivance. The High Court has also stated that no evidence had been shown to justify the allegations that any outsider had helped the candidate, including the respondent. That, in brief, is the genesis of the final conclusion of the High Court. 6. It appears that the High Court was in error in assuming that the only charge against the respondent was that he had copied from the paper of the candidat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e rivalries and party politics in the Municipal Board of Bindki that runs the institution at which this examination was held, and there are rivalries and party politics even amongst the members of the staff. The members of the Municipal Board and other influential people of the locality being undue pressure on the Principal and the Invigilators to help their wards or the wards of their friends and relatives in the Board's Examination. As a result of this unhealthy atmosphere, the center at Bindki for High School examination had been abolished for some years, but on account of public pressure it was re-started in 1960, and the result was very unfortunate. 8. It also appears that on the day of English paper, while students were answering the paper in Room No. 3, an answer paper by some outsider was dropped into the room 15 minutes before the time to answer questions was over. This paper was thrown in room No. 3 from room No. 18. It was a typed paper giving answers to all the Questions. The Assistant teacher, Khajuha, who was one of the Invigilators, complained that the Parcha was typed in the office of the Superintendent of the center, but this allegation was denied. Indeed, f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on source. The significance of this fact has been completely missed by the High Court. The question before the Enquiry Committee had to be decided by it in the light of the nature of the incorrect answers themselves, and that is what the Enquiry Committee has done. It would, we think, be inappropriate in such a case to require direct evidence to show that the respondent could have looked back and copied from the answer written by the other candidate who was sitting behind him. There was still the alternative possibility that the candidate sitting behind may have copied from the respondent with his connivance. It is also not unlikely that the two candidates may have talked to each other. The atmosphere prevailing in the Examination Hall does not rule out this possibility. These are all matters which the Enquiry Committee had to consider, and the fact that the Enquiry Committee did not write an elaborate report, does not mean that it did not consider all the relevant facts before it came to the conclusion that the respondent had used unfair means. 12. In dealing with petitions of this type, it is necessary to bear in mind that educational institutions like the Universities or appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
