Gujarat High Court
Managing Trustee, Panchmahal Jilla ... vs Gujarat Technology University on 3 September, 2020
Author: Biren Vaishnav
Bench: Biren Vaishnav
C/SCA/7439/2020 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7439 of 2020
==========================================================
MANAGING TRUSTEE, PANCHMAHAL JILLA SHIKSHAN PRACHARAK
MANDAL
Versus
GUJARAT TECHNOLOGY UNIVERSITY
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. MITUL SHELAT, ADVOCATE WITH MS DISHA N NANAVATY(2957) for
the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2
MR DG SHUKLA(1998) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIREN VAISHNAV
Date : 03/09/2020
ORAL ORDER
1 Rule returnable forthwith. Learned advocate appearing for the respondent waives service of rule. With the consent of learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, taken up for final hearing today. 2 The order under challenge in this petition which is adjudicated upon is only the order dated 02.06.2020, passed by the Gujarat Technological University, by which, the petitioner No.2-College has been imposed a penalty of Rs.1 lakh and further the University has informed the College that no exam centre will be allocated to the institute for summer 2020 and winter 2020 examination.
3 Heard Mr.Mitul Shelat, learned advocate with Ms.Disha Nanavaty, learned advocate for the petitioners and Mr.D.G.Shukla, learned advocate appearing for the respondent - University.
Page 1 of 3 Downloaded on : Fri Sep 04 02:31:43 IST 2020 C/SCA/7439/2020 ORDER 4 Without adverting to the facts in detail, the case of the petitioner is that the students of the college who appeared in the paper of Basic Engineering Drawing, were found to have adopted unfair means. Show cause notices were issued to the students. The notices indicates that the students were hereby called upon to show cause as to why the punishment prescribed under the notification be not imposed.
5 Mr.D.G.Shukla, learned advocate for the respondent - University, would contend that even the staff members were informed with regard to the cases of the Unfair Means Committee and were asked to remain present on 21.03.2020.
6 Reading of the impugned order would indicate that the reliance in debarring the College from having an examination centre and the penalty is based on the report of the experts, which Mr.Shelat, learned advocate and Mr.Shukla, learned advocate have taken me through pages 42, 44 and 46 of the petition which indicates that there was a common threat as far as answering pattern of the questions, by the students was concerned. The University has filed an affidavit-in-reply. The primary objection is that the Trust cannot file the petition. The report and the letter of 24th January of one Shri Rajdipsinh Chavda who suggested that the students adopted unfair means is pressed into service. CCTV footage of the petitioner college was Page 2 of 3 Downloaded on : Fri Sep 04 02:31:43 IST 2020 C/SCA/7439/2020 ORDER examined, which according to the deponent of the University was not having any clear vision. The tenor of the affidavit would, therefore, indicate that when read in context of the impugned order, there is nothing in the order reflecting reasons as to how the examination centre / college contributed or facilitated the students in adopting unfair means if no such material has been put forth for the information of the college before the order of 02.06.2020 has been passed.
7 Accordingly, the order dated 02.06.2020 is quashed and set aside only on the ground of it having been passed in violation of principles of natural justice and without assigning any reasons as to how the petitioner college facilitated unfair means of the students. It is clarified that the orders by which the students have been penalized i.e. 20.05.2020 are not interfered with because the students have not come forth to challenge the same while deciding the issue. However, the University shall take into consideration the entire aspect of the examination in context of the role of the petitioner's college in facilitating the students to adopt unfair means. Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to pass fresh order in accordance with law. The petition is partly allowed, accordingly. Rule is made absolute to the above extent.
(BIREN VAISHNAV, J) BIMAL Page 3 of 3 Downloaded on : Fri Sep 04 02:31:43 IST 2020