The Tamil Nadu Dr.Ambedkar Law University & Anr vs K.Jayakaran

This writ appeal has been filed against the order passed by this Court dated 09.11.2017 in W.P.No.27829 of 2017.

The respondent is a lawyer by profession. He is pursuing LLM Course in the Constitutional Law and Human Rights in the appellant University.

He wrote second semester during May 2017 and also one arrear paper in the first semester, on 26.04.2017. The results of the examinations in

respect of the respondent were withheld alleging some malpractice practised by him in the examination. A show cause notice dated 08.08.2017

was issued to the respondent for the enquiry which was to be conducted on 23.08.2017. After getting explanation dated 17.08.2017 from the

respondent in the enquiry, an order was passed by the second appellant on 31.08.2017 cancelling all the papers written in that session and his

eligibility to appear for November 2017 examination.

The respondent approached this Court by filing a writ petition in W.P.No.27829 of 2017 seeking to quash the said order passed by the second

appellant dated 31.08.2017 in Ref.No.1968/COE/C1/2017 and to direct the appellants herein to publish the results of all the papers written by the

respondent in the 2nd semester L.L.M. (Constitutional Law and Human Rights) including one arrear in 1st semester in April/May 2017 exams.

The allegation against the respondent is that he disclosed his identity in the answer sheet by writing his name and registration number in respect

of one subject, viz. Judicial Process and that was the allegation raised in the show cause notice as well. The respondent gave an explanation dated

17.08.2017 stating that the mistake was committed unintentionally and nothing is gained by him by disclosing his identity. However, after enquiry,

the second appellant cancelled all the papers written by the respondent in that session. It was submitted on behalf of the respondent before the writ

Court that no proper opportunity was given to the respondent and that the respondent has not gained anything by disclosing the identity. After

hearing the parties and also considering the student''s future, the learned single Judge has passed the order impugned herein, giving liberty to the

appellants to issue warning to the respondent with regard to the other papers instead of cancelling them, as cancellation was done already for one

paper. Except Judicial Process paper, the results for the other papers were directed to be published by the University before 10.11.2017. It was

also observed by the learned single Judge that with regard to cancellation of other examinations, since as per the show cause notice, the

respondent was accused of disclosing identity in only one paper, viz. Judicial Process, the appellants are bound to restrict themselves only to that

particular paper.

Challenging the order passed in the writ petition, the present writ appeal has been filed by the University.

Mr.Vijay Narayan, learned Advocate General appearing for the appellant-University has submitted that the learned single Judge ought to have

considered the fact that though show cause notice was issued to the respondent with regard to the malpractice committed by him while writing one

paper, viz. Judicial Process, the duly constituted Disciplinary Committee is vested with the powers to examine all the related documents

exhaustively during the course of enquiry. He also submitted that the learned single Judge ought to have considered the fact that after detecting the

malpractices committed by the respondent in all the other papers also, the Disciplinary Committee cannot ignore such malpractices and allow the

publication of the results. Stating so, he prayed for quashing the order passed by the learned single Judge.

Reiterating the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent, the learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that the order passed by

the learned single Judge is a just and reasonable one in the facts and circumstances of the case and that the respondent will not indulge in any such

kind of malpractices in future.

As per the submission made by the learned Advocate General appearing for the appellant-University, the duly constituted Disciplinary

Committee is vested with the powers to examine all the related documents exhaustively during the course of enquiry and hence, having found

malpractices in the other papers also, the Disciplinary Committee cannot ignore such malpractices and allow the publication of the results. As per

the Annexure-Tamil Nadu State Council for Higher Education ""On Controlling Malpractices in University Examinations"", the punishment that can

be ordered is cancellation of examination.

With regard to Judicial Process paper, the learned single Judge has held that the appellants would be justified in cancelling the exam written by

the respondent in respect of that paper alone. Now, it is stated by the learned Advocate General that as per the order passed by the learned single

Judge the said examination has been cancelled and the respondent also wrote the examination for the said paper in the subsequent session for

which results will be announced. The said statement made by the learned Advocate General is recorded.

With regard to other papers, it appears that results have not been published. Taking into consideration the submissions made by the learned

Advocate General for the appellants and also the facts and circumstances of the case, the second appellant-Controller of Examinations, Tamil

Nadu Dr.Ambedkar Law University, is directed to issue notice to the respondent to appear before him on 17.01.2018 for personal hearing. If the

act of the respondent by way of declaring his identity is found to be not intentional and it was only by way of ignorance, then, he may be warned

and results shall be published. If the act of the respondent is found to be intentional, the punishment would be to cancel the examinations already

written and to permit him to write the examinations in the next ensuing session. Appropriate order shall be passed in this regard, by the second

appellant on or before 19.01.2018.

With the above observations and directions, the writ appeal is disposed of. No costs. Consequently the connected miscellaneous petition is

closed.