1. The petitioner no. 1 is Committee of Management of a Degree College, namely, Babu Gulab Singh Gaharwar Degree College Banheta, Gaura, District Mirzapur (for short, the "College"), whereas petitioner no. 2 is its Manager. The petitioners have preferred this writ petition for issuance of a writ of certiorari for quashing of the order dated 07th August, 2012 passed by the Controller of Examination, Mahatma Gandhi Kashi Vidyapith Varanasi, whereby it has imposed the fine to a tune of Rs.3 lakhs upon the College for mass-copying and cancelled the examination held in the College in the Second Session on 03rd April, 2012.
2. The essential facts are that the College is affiliated with the Mahatma Gandhi Kashi Vidyapith, Varanasi (for short, the "University"). The affairs of the College are governed by the provisions of the Uttar Pradesh State Universities Act, 1973 (for short, the "Act, 1973") and the First Statute of the University. It is stated that on 03rd April, 2012 when the examination of the academic session 2011-12 was going on, the Flying Squad of the University made a surprise visit of the College during the examination of Second Session. In the said visit, the Flying Squad found that large number of students of the College were involved in adopting unfair means. The Members of the Flying Squad found huge unauthorised materials. The Flying Squad submitted its report to the University. It is stated that on the basis of the said report submitted by the Flying Squad, the University issued a show cause notice, to which the Center In-charge of the College submitted a reply. The Examinations Committee has considered the explanation of the College and passed the impugned order, whereby the examination held in the second session on 03rd April, 2012 in the College has been cancelled and a fine to a tune of Rs. 3 lakhs has been imposed on the College on account of mass-copying. Against this background, the petitioners have filed the present writ petition. Learned Counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance on a judgement of this Court in the case of Adarsh Shiksha Mandir Inter College v. State of U.P. and others, 2011 (3) ADJ 605.
3. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents. The stand taken by the respondents is that on 03rd April, 2012 during the second session of examination at 2.15 P.M. the Flying Squad, constituted by the University comprising of Professor and Senior Teachers, conducted a surprise visit in the College and found an alarming situation prevailed in the examination room. The students immediately started throwing the unauthorised materials, as a result whereof a large amount of cheating materials collected inside the Room No. 1 as well as outside. The Invigilators were also found involved in throwing the chits. Five students were caught red handed. However, if sufficient time was made available to the Flying Squad, there was a possibility of catching all the students having chits in their possession. The Members of Flying Squad were of the opinion that the College was carrying out the whole cheating activities in a preplanned manner and, therefore, they recommended that the examination of the session in question be cancelled and the examination centre be changed. A copy of the report of Flying Squad has been brought on record as annexure-1 to the counter affidavit. The Examinations Committee of the University had received similar reports from various Flying Squads about 11 centres (11 colleges). The Examinations Committee considered the report of the Flying Squad and the representations submitted by the respective colleges and resolved to cancel the examination concerned and impose fine upon such colleges. It is further stated that the Examinations Committee is comprised of Experts having high academic qualifications and long experience in the specialized fields. It is also stated by the respondents that in the writ petition there is no allegation of malafide against any of the officers of the University or the Members of the Flying Squad. The University has further relied upon a judgement of this Court dated 07th January, 2013 passed in Writ-C No. 48018 of 2012 (The C/M Keshav Prasad Ralhi Mahavidyalaya and others v. The State of U.P. and others).
4. I have heard Sri Punit Khare, learned Counsel for the petitioners, and Sri Vivek Varma, learned Counsel for the respondents.
5. The petitioners have not denied the fact that the Flying Squad had made a visit of the College and found 5 students using unauthorised materials during the examination. The report of the Flying Squad discloses the shocking affairs of the College. It is noted in the report that large number of unauthorised materials were thrown by the students and even some of the Invigilators were also seen throwing the unauthorised materials when they saw Members of the Flying Squad. This fact clearly demonstrates that the Members of the Flying Squad found that unfair means were adopted in a preplanned manner in the College. The College is governed by the Act, 1973. Chapter 5 of the Act, 1973 deals with the authorities of the University. Under Section 19 (h) of the Act, 1973 the Examinations Committee is one of the authorities of the University. Section 29 of the Act, 1973 enumerates various duties of the Examinations Committee. Section 29(4) of the Act, 1973 provides that the Examinations Committee or a sub-Committee or any person, to whom the Examinations Committee has delegated its power, can debar an examinee from future examinations of the University, if in its or his opinion, such examinee is guilty of using unfair means at any such examination.
6. In the case in hand, the Examinations Committee has considered the report of the Flying Squad and the petitioners' College was given opportunity to represent its case. The petitioners have submitted a representation against the report of the Flying Squad. Thus, there was no violation of the principles of natural justice. In several decisions, the Supreme Court has observed that the purity of the examination should be maintained for high standard of the education. It is duty of the authorities to maintain the purity and fairness of examination. Any laxity or negligence in keeping the purity of examination shall have a far reaching consequence for the society. The Supreme Court in the case of Controller of Examinations and others v. G.S. Sunder and another, 1993 Supp (3) SCC 82, has observed as under:
"10...........After all, the authorities in charge of education whose duty it is to conduct examinations fairly and properly, know best how to deal with situations of this character. One cannot import fine principles of law and weigh the same in golden scales. In the present system of education, the system of examinations is the best suited to assess the progress of the student so long as they are fairly conducted. Interference by court in every case may lead to unhappy results making the system of examination a farce. For instance, we cannot but strongly condemn copying in the examination which has grown into canker of mass copying. Such unhealthy practices which are like poisonous weeds in the field of education must be rooted out in order that the innocent and the intelligent students are not affected. We feel that:
"The hour has come when we must clear The educational fields from poison and from fear; We must remould our standards -- build them higher, And clear the air as though by cleansing fire, Weed out the damning traitors to education, Restore her to her ancient place of awe.""
7. The said view has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in the case of Director (Studies), Dr. Ambedkar Institute of Hotel Management, Nutrition & Catering Technology, Chandigarh and others v. Vaibhav Singh Chauhan, (2009) 1 SCC 59, which reads as under:
"12........We are of the firm opinion that in academic matters there should be strict discipline and malpractices should be severely punished. If our country is to progress we must maintain high educational standards, and this is only possible if malpractices in examinations in educational institutions are curbed with an iron hand."
8. On the similar facts, where the University had imposed the fine to a tune of Rs. 3 lakhs upon the concerned college, this Court in The C/M Keshav Prasad Ralhi Mahavidyalaya (supra) has upheld the imposition of fine in the following words:
"In fact on the basis of mass copying recognition should have been cancelled. However, a lenient view was taken and only a penalty of Rs. 3 lacs was imposed which under no circumstances can be said to be excessive. In case of mass copying institution is directly responsible and its financial interest cannot be ruled out. Accordingly, I do not find any error in the impugned order."
9. In The C/M Keshav Prasad Ralhi Mahavidyalaya (supra) this Court has further observed as under:
"The respondent University did something quite commendable by getting the examination centre examined by flying squad. Let this exercise be done every year. It is further directed that in case an institution is found indulging in mass copying twice recognition and affiliation shall be cancelled."
10. The judgement of Adarsh Shiksha Mandir Inter College (supra) as relied upon by the learned Counsel for the petitioners is not applicable in the present case as the facts of the said case are distinguishable. In the said case, the institution, which was an Inter College, was debarred from functioning as a centre for the Board Examinations conducted by the Board of High School and Intermediate Education and the Court has considered validity of the provisions of Chapter VI-B of the Regulations framed under the Uttar Pradesh Intermediate Education Act, 1921. Moreover, the judgements of the Supreme Court, as referred above, were not brought to the notice of the Court.
11. After careful consideration of the matter, I am of the view that the decision of the Examinations Committee does not warrant any interference. A direction is issued upon the University that in future if mass copying is again found in the College by the Flying Squad, the affiliation of the College shall be cancelled complying with the direction of this Court given in The C/M Keshav Prasad Ralhi Mahavidyalaya (supra).
12. In view of the above, the writ petition lacks merit and it is accordingly dismissed.
13. No order as to costs.
Order Date :- 14th February, 2014.
SKT/-
Hon. Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel, J.
The writ petition is dismissed.
For judgement and order, see my order of the date passed on the separate sheets (six pages).
Dt.- 14th February, 2014.
SKT/-