Tilak Chand S/O. Yashvantaraya ... vs The State Of Karnataka on 15 November, 2012

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Tilak Chand S/O. Yashvantaraya ... vs The State Of Karnataka on 15 November, 2012

Bench: Ram Mohan Reddy

                           1




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
              CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD

       DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2012

                       BEFORE

       THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM MOHAN REDDY

         WRIT PETITION NO. 71355/2012 (EDN-EX)

BETWEEN :

TILAK CHAND
S/O. YASHAVANTARAYA NAVALGUND
AGE. 23 YEARS, OCC.STUDENT,
R/O. SUBHAS NAGAR,
KESHWAPUR, HUBLI.
(REGISTER NO. 341 E C 08053).
                                         ... PETITIONER

(BY SRI SADASHIV S. PATIL, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
       REP. BY ITS SECRETARY,
       DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION,
       VIDHAN SOUDHA, BANGALORE.

2.     THE DIRECTOR OF
       DEPARTMENT OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION,
       PALACE ROAD, BANGALORE-1.

3.     THE PRINCIPAL
       KLE POLYTECHNIC COLLEGE,
       HUBLI, COLLEGE CODE 341.
                                       ... RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT. K. VIDYAVATHI, A.G.A. FOR R1 & R2)
                             2




     THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH
THE GOVERNMENT CIRCULAR DATED 15.09.2012 ISSUED
BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-A INSOFAR
PETITIONER IS CONCERNED AND ETC.

    THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                        ORDER

Petitioner, a student of IV Semester in the Diploma Course - Electronics and Communication, having appeared for the examination in the subject Micro Controller and its Applications, was found carrying a slip of paper in his pocket, by the Vigilance Squad and was charged with mal-practice, which when admitted in an enquiry, led to the order dated 15.09.2012, Annexure-A, imposing the punishment of cancellation of the exam performance for all the subjects of the IV Semester. Hence, this petition.

2. Although learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was declared pass in four out of 3 seven subjects and failed in three, since shown as absent against the subject in which he was apprehended for mal-practice and in another subject obtained 18 marks, while in yet another subject did not appear for the examination, the authorities ought to have taken a lenient view and impose the punishment of cancelling the exam performance in the subject Micro Controller and its Applications only, in the circumstances is unacceptable.

3. In matters of discipline, particularly mal- practice committed by a student in a technical course ought to be dealt with a strong arm, since any leniency shown would only embolden the student to re-perform the very same feat in future examinations. So also leniency would send a strong wrong signal to other studious students appearing for the examinations. Even otherwise, if a candidate is allowed to go scot-free though attempted to fudge the examination answer 4 sheet by adopting several methods of mal-practice would not acquire technical skills, and would not subserve the purpose for which the Diploma course is structured so as to ensure development and enable employment, uplift the masses and compete with the developments in other countries. If this is kept in mind, the punishment imposed on the petitioner in my opinion does not call for interference.

4. It is also noticed from the order Annexure-A that similarly placed students have been imposed with the punishment of cancellation of the exam performance.

5. In the circumstances, the order does not call for interference and the writ petition is accordingly rejected.

SD/-

JUDGE hnm/

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court