Court No. - 2 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 37683 of 2015 Petitioner :- C/M Maa Gayatri Mahila Mahavidyalaya Thru' Its Manager
Respondent :- State Of U.P. & 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Dhirendra Kr. Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Vivek Varma
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned standing counsel for the State- respondent and Sri Vivek Varma, learned counsel appearing for the respondents no. 2 to 5.
This writ petition has been filed for issuing a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 13.6.2015 passed by the respondent no. 4 by which the results of the students of the College of the relevant date have been cancelled on account of mass copying by imposing a penalty of Rs. 3,00,000/- upon the institution and debarring the College from making examination centre for three years. The submissions have been made by learned counsel for the petitioners that the order impugned has been passed without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners as neither the copy of the inquiry report nor the report of the examination controller of the centre was provided to the petitioners before passing the impugned order. It has also been argued that the order impugned has been passed because of malafide of flying squad. It is well settled that no man should be condemned unheard in view of law laid down by the Apex Court in State of W.B. Vs. Anwar Ali Sarkar 1952 SCR 284, Maneka Gandhi Vs. Union of India (1978) 1 SCC 248, Mohinder Singh Gill Vs. Chief Election Commissioner (1978) 1 SCC 405,D.K.Yadav Vs. J.M.A. Industries Ltd. 1993, 3 SCC 259, Whirlpool Corporation Vs. Registrar of Trade Marks 1998 (8) SCC, Canara Bank Vs. V.K.Awasthy 2005 (6) SCC 321,
Bidhannagar (Salt Lake) Welfare Assn. Vs. Central Valuation Board and Others (2007) 6 SCC 668, and Devdutt Vs.Union of India and others 2008 (3) ESC 433 (SC).
However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case that the matter relates to the mass copying of the students and sanctity of the examination is to be maintained, the order impugned is not Neutral Citation No. - 2015:AHC:91299
1
quashed and the petitioners are provided post decisional hearing in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Maneka Gandhi Vs. Union of India AIR 1978 SC 597, Union of India Vs. Tulsi Ram Patel 1985 (3) SCC 398, I.J. Rao Assistant Collector of Customs Vs. Bibhuti Bagh 1989 (3) SCC 202, Canara Bank Vs. V.K.Awasthi 2005 (6) SCC 321, Muzeeb Vs. Deputy Director of Consolidation and others 1996 (87) RD 66 and Chaturgun Vs. State of U.P. 2005 (2) AWC 1256.
In this regard, the petitioners may file their objection to the impugned order within a period of two weeks from today along with certified copy of the order of this Court and the University thereon shall take decision considering the petitioners' objection within six weeks thereafter.Till then, the order impugned shall be kept in abeyance.
The writ petition is disposed of finally.
(Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.)
Order Date :- 10.7.2015
RKP
2