Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

32. In view of what has been stated above, I will allow the appeal, set aside the decision of the learned single Judge of this Court and issue a writ of mandamus directing the opposite parties to forbear from enforcing resolution No. 86, dated 5-9-1954. The appellants shall get their costs of both hearings from the opposite parties.

Dayal, J.

33. I have read the judgment of my brother Brij Mohan Lall and agree that the Examinations Committee is not required to act judicially or quasi-judicially when it considers cases falling under Clause (1) of Paragraph I, Chapter VI of the Regulations made by the Board of High School and Intermediate Education, U. P., and which cases include a case where examinees have used unfair means at an examination. It follows, therefore, that the Examinations Committee acts administratively when it considers cases of examinees using unfair means at an examination.

These remarks appear to apply to quasi-judicial Tribunals which are not strictly judicial Tribunals and which Tribunals have the duty of investigating certain matter and then to take disciplinary action. This cannot be said in the present case about the the Examinations Committee. it was not a judicial or quasi-judicial Tribunal.

No duty was cast on it to investigate any, matter. It was just to consider cases of the use of unfair means by examinees and impose certain penalties. It had nothing to investigate. It had merely to consider whether the matters brought to its notice would indicate the use of unfair means by candidates and if it was of the opinion that unfair means had been used it could take the necessary action.

70. On account of some complaints against the appellants that they had used unfair means at the examination, the Examinations Committee of the Board appointed a sub-committee to go into the question. The sub-committee found that the answer to question No. 1 in the paper on book-keeping and accountancy in the appellants' answer books tallied word for word and also agreed with a typed copy which was distributed among the examinees on the date of the examination.

The sub-committee in ex parte proceedings came to the conclusion that the appellants had used unfair means at the examination. This was adopted by the Examinations Committee Which by a resolution dated 5-9-1954, resolved that the results of the appellants' examination be cancelled and further that they be debarred from appearing at the Board's examination of 1955.

To brand a candidate with the stigma of, adoption of unfair means at the examination or in other words finding him or her guilty of dishonesty or misconduct & thereby causing an irreparable injury to the character and reputation of such candidate, without giving him or her any opportunity to explain, is contrary to all notions of justice and good sense."

109. it may be noted that when the Examinations Committee records a finding that the appellants were guilty of using unfair means at the examination and cancels the result of that examination on that ground and further debars them from appearing at the ensuing examination, the Committee, does not merely take away a privilege granted to the appellants but affect their natural right to reputation with serious consequences to them in their career.