JUDGMENT Ravi S. Dhavan, J.
1. Ten defective beyond limitation special appeals have been filed. These appeals, all of them, have been filed on behalf of the Director, Board of High School and Intermediate Education. One appeal is beyond limitation by five years. These cases relate to allegations by the Board of High School and Intermediate Education (hereinafter referred to as the Board) that the students who had appeared in various examinations had indulged in unfair means. In the circumstances, the results of the examination, whether of High School or Intermediate had been withheld. The allegations against the students whose results had been withheld came in various shades. These allegations were categorised as mass copying common mistakes, doubtful cases, etc.
2. Each of these candidates filed writ petitions. A writ of certiorari had been issued to the Board to place before the High Court, the inquiry report and the answer books. In each of these ten cases, the record was examined by the Hon'ble Judge. The assessment of the Hon'ble Judge, upon perusing the record is decisive, but diverse.
3. This Court has examined each one of the records of the writ petitions. The comments of the Hon'ble Judge are to the effect. In some cases there has been no inquiry so as to make an allegation that there has been a mass copying. In other cases, results have been withheld merely because there have been common mistakes. There are cases where despite the record having been asked upon a writ of certiorari, the answer books had not been produced and the Hon'ble Judge has recorded it so. There are some cases in which the inquiry reports, despite a writ of certiorari having been issued, have not been produced. Then, there are eases in which the Hon'ble Judge examined the record and came to the conclusion that the answers may be similar, but it cannot be presumed that there was any attempt to copy. There are cases where the Hon'ble Judge came to the opinion that there was no similarity so as to make an allegation that there had been cheating. Lastly there are cases, in which the Hon'ble Judge came to the conclusion that there is no report of an invigilator and yet an allegation of mass copying has been made. The examinations in question, whether of High School or Intermediate, are of the years between 1992 and 1997.
4. Each one of the special appeals has been presented along with an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. All the appeals are beyond limitation. The Board was under a direction to declare the result of the candidate concerned, within a lime bound period and in most of the cases, the directions issued by the Hon'ble Judge deciding the writ petition, was that the results be declared within a period of one month. Instead of declaring the result, the Board thought it fit to appeal against the judgment. Even if this Court were to condone the delay in filing of the appeals, the hearing of these appeals will probably be in the next century. By this time, the young people who took the examination will be beyond the maximum age for any entrance examination to a university, specialist institutes or public service. The Board ought to have been satisfied with the verdict of the Hon'ble Judge given in the writ petition which was rendered after having examined the record produced before him and it was certified by a certiorari that the action of the Board in making allegations against the candidates were not correct.
5. A continuous trial cannot take place on allegation that a young student may have cheated. The decision of the Hon'ble Judge, against which the appeal has been filed and that also beyond limitation, is upon a prima facie satisfaction of the record that the allegations of cheating or unfair means does not hold.
6. Learned Chief Standing Counsel, U. P., Mr. Ashok Mehta, at the time when these matters were taken up had requested the Court that the matters be adjourned. He has stated that in the meantime, he has advised the Board that withholding the examinations will serve no useful purpose and he had also advised the Board to declare the results. He had made a statement that the Board had issued instructions to the Divisions, concerned, that is, the Meerut Division and the Varanasi Division that the results of the candidates be declared consequent upon the decision on the writ petition by the Hon'ble single Judge. An affidavit to this effect has been filed by the Secretary and the Deputy Secretary of the Board.
7. There is no question of condoning the delay in the filing of the appeals. These are time barred appeals. Indeed, if the Board was serious in impugning the judgment of the Hon'ble Judge, then, care ought to have been taken to file the appeals within time. As it is, the careers of the students, concerned, may be in Jeopardy as the result of his first public examination will be rendered when the candidate may be overage while applying for competitive job examination.
8. In the circumstances, that the Hon'ble Judge has certified the record that he could not come to the conclusion that the allegation of cheating or unfair means could be sustained, there is no occasion for the appellate court to sit in judgment over the decision of the Hon'ble Judge, merely to take a second opinion when this Court finds that the first opinion is not incorrect. This Court does not desire to reassess any Judgment so issued and passed upon a certiorari action, specially in matters relating to the cases making allegations on students, of having used unfair means. In the circumstances, the decisions of the Hon'ble Judge, as have been rendered, stand and are affirmed.
9. It is another matter that the reality of the situation may be that there is a mass copying or students resort to unfair means, but this aspect is not before the Court and the Court is not called upon to answer any particular case. Suffice it to say that these are diseases and symptoms of a memory oriented examination system which encouraged situations the like of which had been presented in these cases. If cheating, mass copying, and using unfair means in examination is to be taken care of, then, the time has come that the Board must innovate an objective curricula and syllabi and likewise an examination system which does not test memory, but application of the student.