Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Taruna Kumari vs Raj Technicial University And Ors on 29 November, 2011
Author: Alok Sharma
Bench: Alok Sharma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH JUDGMENT S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.7249/2011 Taruna Kumari Vs. Rajasthan Technical University, Rawatbhata Road, Kota & Ors. Date of Order: 29/11/2011 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SHARMA Mr. Arvind Sharma, for the petitioner.
Mr. A.K. Bhargava, for the respondent-University.
The petitioner was admitted to B.Tech course at the Lords Institute of Engineering & Technology, Alwar affiliated to the Rajasthan Technical University. The petitioner appeared for B.Tech 1st Semester examination and failed in two subjects in the year 2009. She re-appeared in the ensuing examination and cleared the back papers of the B.Tech 1st Semester. Thereafter, the petitioner appeared in the B. Tech 2nd Semester Examination and again failed to pass two papers namely Engineering Mathematic-II and Physics. In spite of having failed in two papers in B.Tech 2nd Semester examination, the petitioner was promoted to the 3rd Semester in the B.Tech course as per the governing regulations. In the meantime, the petitioner appears to have taken the B.Tech 3rd Semester examination and cleared all the papers. Thereafter, in the month July, 2010, the Rajasthan Technical University declared the schedule for the 4th Semester examinations starting 08.07.2010 and ending 23.07.2010.
In the course of the 4th Semester examination, the petitioner was found to be using unfair means on 12.07.2010 in the course of writing the examination in the paper of Analogy Electronic. The petitioner was issued a show cause notice and she filed a response denying the allegations. In the meantime, pending a decision on the show cause notice relating to use of unfair means, the petitioner appears to have studied in the 5th and 6th Semesters of B.Tech course after depositing the requisite semester fee. In fact, the respondent-University also appears to have issued admit card to the petitioner for writing the 5th Semester examination. Consequently, the petitioner appeared for the 5th semester examination which were held between 29.12.2010 to 08.01.2011.
As a result of the B.Tech 5th semester examinations were not declared in terms of the governing Ordinances, the petitioner was promoted to the B.Tech 6th semester and allowed to attend regular classes therefor.
The case of the petitioner is that the Respondent-University issued examination time-table for the 6th semester commencing 23.05.2011. However, when the petitioner approached the college for collecting the permission letter for appearing in B.Tech 6th Semester examination, she was told that no such permission letter could be issued in her name for the B.Tech 6th Semester examination. The petitioner was informed that in terms of an order dated 12.05.2011, issued by the Examinations Controller, Rajasthan Technical University, the petitioner's examination of 4th Semester and 5th Semester, along with the result of two papers of the 2nd Semester which had been written by the petitioner as back papers, was declared cancelled by the respondent-University finding her guilty of using unfair means at the 4th Semester examination held on 12.07.2010 in the subject of Analogy Electronic.
Aggrieved of the order dated 12.05.2011 and the consequences thereof, counsel for the petitioner submits the University be directed to allow the petitioner to write B.Tech 6th Semester examination. It is submitted that assuming without admitting that the petitioner was guilty of use of unfair means, the punishment imposed upon her under the order dated 12.05.2011 was drastic and disproportionate. It is submitted that a representation to the University authorities having not been of any avail, the has petitioner approached this Court with the prayer that the order dated 12.05.2011 may be quashed and set aside and the respondent-University be directed to allow the petitioner to write the B.Tech 6th Semester Examinations commencing 12.12.2011.
Heard the counsel for the petitioner as also the respondent-University and perused the writ petition.
The issue of use of unfair means at examinations has been a recurring issue and it has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that the use of unfair means at any examination should be dealt with an iron hand. Reference in this regard can be held to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of Director (Studies), Dr. Ambedkar Institute of Hotel Management, Nutrition & Catering Technology, Chandigarh & ors. Vs. Vaibhav Singh Chauhan [(2009) 1 SCC 59]. A similar view has been taken by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bihar Public Service Commission & Anr. Vs. Vinoy Kumar Singh & Anr. [(2003) 7 SCC 28]. The Division Bench of this Court has also followed the same line of reasoning and expressed a similar view in the case of Priyanka Meena Vs. Chairman, RPSC [RLR 2001 (3) 556] holding that when a candidate was found of using unfair means, the courts should restrain themselves from interfering either with the conclusions of the enquiry or with the punishment in respect thereof.
Mr. Bhargava has also relied upon a judgment of this Court in Ganpat Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. [RLW 1999 (1) Raj. 254] wherein this Court has held that in matters pertaining to use of unfair means, where students are found guilty, there is no reason for the order of punishment to be a reasoned order and further that a writ court is not an appellate court and cannot sit over the discretion of the authority in inflicting punishment for use of unfair means. There can be no quarrel with the above stated position of law.
Be that as it may, the facts of this case however, may warrant the intrusion of equity in favour of the petitioner in view of the fact that subsequent to the B.Tech 4th Semester examination, there was a delay in finding the petitioner guilty and imposition of punishment for the use of unfair means. It is on record and not disputed that the petitioner has, since the relevant B.Tech 4th Semester paper in which she was found using unfair means, been admitted to B.Tech 5th Semester on payment of requisite fee and also allowed to write the B.Tech 5th Semester examination. Similarly the petitioner was also admitted into the B.Tech 6th Semester on payment of requisite fee and has studied the entire duration of the B.Tech 6th Semester before being informed that she cannot write the B.Tech 6th Semester Examination in view of the order of punishment dated 12.05.2011.
These aspects of the matter need to be considered by the Vice-Chancellor, Rajasthan Technical University for the purpose of determining as to how the equities of the case have a bearing on the punishment to be imposed on the petitioner for the infraction of law in resorting to use of unfair means in the paper Analogy Electronic in the B.Tech 4th Semester examination. This aspect of the matter has not been considered while passing the order dated 12.05.2011.
Consequently, I would dispose of the writ petition and even while presently denying any relief to the petitioner, allow the petitioner to make a detailed representation to the Vice-Chancellor, RTU with regard to prejudice caused to the petitioner if the punisment imposed on the petitioner were not to be reviewed. In the event the representation is made to the Vice-Chancellor, RTU within a period of four days from today, the Vice Chancellor, RTU shall decide the same taking a sympathetic and wholestic view of the matter particularly the fact that the petitioner has written and passed the 5th Semester examination and studied the whole session in the 6th Semester after due permission from the University.
Before parting this case, I would like to observe that even though the issue of use of unfair means in the examinations ought to be generally visited with strictness and not with leniency, yet correspondingly it is the obligation of the University to observe a very tight time schedule for conclusion of enquiry into use of unfair means and punishment therefor such that the delays in the imposition of punishment do not create complications - as in this case where the student who in the meanwhile is allowed by the University to study in higher classes and write examinations is thereafter faced with the prospect of an overwhelming loss of his time and money consequent to a belated order of punishment undoing everything. The law against unintended consequences is a casualty in such cases.
With these observations, the writ petition stand disposed of. Stay application is also disposed of.
(ALOK SHARMA), J.
MS/