Heard learned counsel for the petitioner Sri Arvind Srivastava and Sarmistha Raghuvanshi holding brief of Sri Ajit Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the Respondent Nos. 2 and 3, and the learned Standing counsel for the Respondent No. 1.
The petitioner institution has been penalized by the imposition of a penalty of Rs. 3,000,00/- on account of an alleged incident of mass-copying in the institution on 27th April, 2012 as alleged in the photostat copy of the order, copy whereof has been filed as annexure-2 to the writ petition.
The said order which is impugned herein strangely enough refers to a decision taken on 24th March, 2012 for imposing this penalty when according to the same document the examinations were held later on i.e. on 27.4.2012.
It is not understandable as to how the decision could have been taken on 24th March, 2012 for an incident which admittedly according to the said document had not taken place on the said date and has taken place 33 days thereafter on 27th April, 2012.
Prima facie to the mind of this Court, this is a strange example of mythological foresight and therefore the same cannot be sustained on any legal grounds. Apart from this, the imposition of penalty of Rs. 3,000,00/- also prima facie does not find support under the statute and ordinances.
Until further orders of the Court, the operation of the order dated 7th August, 2012 shall remain stayed.
Learned counsel for the respondent University prays for and is granted three weeks' time to file counter affidavit. Learned counsel for the petitioner shall file rejoinder affidavit within a week thereafter. List thereafter.
Order Date :- 3.9.2012 Sahu