# Jayanti Prasad Dwivedi v. University of Allahabad through its V.C

- **Citation:** (2000) 3 ILRA 159
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 1997-12-08
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/jayanti-prasad-dwivedi-v-university-of-allahabad-through-its-v-c-39499
- **Pages:** 3

## Text

3All] Jayanti Prasad Dwivedi V. University of Allahabad through its V.C. 159

 in
accordance
with
law.
All
questions with regard to the merits and
the claims of the respective parties shall
remain open to be agitated in appropriate
proceeding if occasion so arise.

$33(//$7( -85,6',&7,21
$33(//$7( -85,6',&7,21
&,9,/ 6,
&,9,/ 6,'(
'(
'$7(' $//$+$%$'
'$7(' $//$+$%$'
%()25(
%()25(
7+( +21·%/( 6+<0$/ .80$5 6(1 &-
7+( +21·%/( 6+<0$/ .80$5 6(1 &-
7+( +21·%/( *3 0$7+85 -
7+( +21·%/( *3 0$7+85 -

6SHFLDO $SSHDO 1R RI

-D\DQWL 3UDVDG 'ZLYHGL
«3HWLWLRQHU
9HUVXV
8QLYHUVLW\ RI $OODKDEDG WKURXJK LWV
9LFH &KDQFHOORU
«5HVSRQGHQWV

&RXQVHO IRU WKH $SSHOODQW
6KUL %% SXDO
&RXQVHO IRU WKH 5HVSRQGHQWV
6KUL %% 3DXO

$UWLFOH RI WKH &RQVWLWXWLRQ RI ,QGLD
WKH GHFLVLRQ RI WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ UHJDUGLQJ
WKH
FDQFHOODWLRQ
RI
WKH
H[DPLQDWLRQ
UHVXOW
RI
WKH
SHWLWLRQHU
ZDV
WDNHQ
ZLWKRXW DIIRUGLQJ KLP DQ RSSRUWXQLW\ RI
KHDULQJWKH VKRZ FDXVH QRWLFH ZDV QRW
VHUYHG RQ WKH SHWLWLRQHU WKH GHFLVLRQ RI
WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ FDQQRW EH VXVWDLQHG DQG
KDV WR EH TXDVKHG
+HOG3DUD
2UGLQDQFH RI WKH 2UGLQDQFHV RQ WKH
XVH
RI
8QIDLU
PHDQV
DQG
FDXVLQJ
'LVWXUEDQFHV
LQ
([DPLQDWLRQ&KDSWHU
;;9,,, RI WKH 2UGLQDQFHV RI $OODKDEDG
8QLYHUVLW\ OD\V GRZQ WKDW D FDQGLGDWH
IRXQG
XVLQJ
XQIDLUPHDQV
LQ
DQ
H[DPLQDWLRQ
VKDOO
EH
VHUYHG
ZLWK
D
QRWLFH WKHUHIRUH LQ WKH H[DPLQDWLRQ KDOO
LWVHOI DQG LI KH
UHIXVHV WR DFFHSW RU
DYRLGV RU HVFDSHV SHUVRQDO UHFHLSW RI
VXFK QRWLFH 6XFK QRWLFH VKDOO EH VHQW WR
KLP
E\
UHJLVWHUHG
SRVW
6LQFH
WKH
PDWHULDO SODFHG EHIRUH XV GRHV QRW VKRZ
WKDW WKH QRWLFH ZDV VHQW WR WKH DSSHOODQW
DW
WKH
FRUUHFW
DGGUHVV
:(
KDYH
WR
DFFHSW
WKH
DSSHOODQW¶V
SOHD
WKDW
WKH
GHFLVLRQ RI WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ ZDV WDNHQ
ZLWKRXW DIIRUGLQJ KLP DQ RSSRUWXQLW\ WR
JLYHQ
D
UHSO\
7KH
GHFLVLRQ
RI
WKH
8QLYHUVLW\ GDWHG FDQQRW EH
VXVWDLQHG DQG K DV WR EH TXDVKHG

By the Court

1. This special appeal is directed
against the judgment and order dated
17.8.1998 of a learned Single Judge by
which writ petition no. 13786 of 1997
filed by the appellant was dismissed.

2. The appellant appeared in L.L.B.
IInd Year examination of the year 1993.
Which was held in the year 1997. It is the
case
of
the
University
that
while
appearing in the IVth paper on 9.4.1997,
the appellant was caught red handed and
some printed material relating to the
aforesaid paper was seized from his
possession. A notice was given to the
appellant and, thereafter. By the order
dated 8.12.1997, the examination of
L.L.B. IInd year of the year 1993 in
which he was appearing in 1997 was
cancelled. The appellant preferred the writ
petition challenging the aforesaid decision
dated 8.12.1997 of the University but the
same was dismissed by a learned Single
Judge on 17.8.1998.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant
has submitted that the impugned order
dated 8.12.1997 has been passed by the
University without issuing any show
cause notice and without giving him any
opportunity of hearing. The judgment and
order of the learned Single Judge does not
show that this point had been urged by the
INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2000

160
appellant at the time of hearing of the writ
petition. On the country what was urged
before the learned Single Judge was that
the material which is alleged to have been
seized
from
the
possession
of
the
appellant had not been used by him
during the course of the examination. The
learned Single Judge was of the opinion
that the use of the material would not
make
any
difference
as
the
mere
possession of the material relating to the
subject was sufficient to prove the charge
of using unfair means and on this finding
dismissed the writ petition. However, as
the question of career of a student is
involved we permitted the learned counsel
to urge the contention regarding not
giving of an opportunity to the appellant
to show cause against the charge levelled
against him.

4. The specific case pleaded in para
9 of the writ petition is that neither any
charge sheet was given nor any show
cause notice was served upon the
appellant and as such there was violation
of principles of natural justice. It is stated
in para 9. 10 13 14 of the counter affidavit
filled on behalf of the respondents that the
appellant was given a show cause notice
in the examination hall itself but as he
refused to accept the same and sign in the
relevant form. The same was sent to him
by registered post on 6.5.1997 at his local
address. It is further stated that since the
appellant did not submit any reply to the
show
cause
notice.
The
university
authorities took an expert decision and
passed the order for cancellation of the
examination.
The
contention
of
the
appellant is that he did not receive the
registered notice as the same was not sent
tat
his
correct
address.
We
have
considered this aspect of the mater
carefully. We are satisfied by the material
placed before us by the learned counsel
for the university that the notice was not
sent to the appellant at his correct address.
Since the notice was not sent at the
correct address. It is not possible to hold
that the show cause notice was actually
served upon the appellant. Ordinance 1.3
of the Ordinances on the Use of Unfair
means and Causing Disturbances in
Examination (Chapter XXVIII) of the
Ordinances of Allahabad University lays
down that a candidate found using unfair
means in an examination shall be served
with a notice therefor in the examination
hall itself and if he refuses to accept or
avoids or escapes personal receipt of such
notice. Such notice shall be sent to him by
registered post. Since the material placed
before us does not show that the notice
was sent to the appellant at the correct
address. We have to accept the appellants
plea that the decision of the University
was taken without affording him an
opportunity to give a reply. The decision
of the University dated 8.12.1997 cannot
be sustained and has to be quashed.

5. In the result the writ petition
succeeds and is hereby allowed. The order
dated
8.12.1997
passed
by
the
respondents is quashed. The respondents
are directed to declare the result of the
appellant of L.L.B IInd year examination
of the year 1993. Which was held in the
year 1997. The appellant shall appear
before the respondents no.2on 28.8.2000.
3All] Dharmendra Pal Dwivedi V. The D.I.O.S., Bulandshahar and another 161

25,*,1$/ -85,6',&7,21
25,*,1$/ -85,6',&7,21
&,9,/ 6,'(
&,9,/ 6,'(
'$7('
'$7(' $//$+$%$' $8*867
$//$+$%$' $8*867
%()25(
%()25(
7+( +21·%/( 0& -$,1 -
7+( +21·%/( 0& -$,1 -

&LYLO 0LVF :ULW 3HWLWLRQ 1R RI

'KDUPHQGUD 3DO 'ZLYHGL
«3HWLWLRQHU
9HUVXV
7KH
'LVWULFW
,QVSHFWRU
RI
6FKRROV
%XODQGVKDKDU DQG DQRWKHU 5HVSRQGHQWV

&RXQVHO IRU WKH 3HWLWLRQHU
6KUL 5DM .XPDU -DLQ
&RXQVHO IRU WKH 5HVSRQGHQWV
0LVV +LQD 5L]YL
6&

83 ,QWHUPHGLDWH (GXFDWLRQ $FW
6V
G
$$
DQG

UHDGZLWK
5HJXODWLRQ ± 5HVLJQDWLRQ E\ 3ULQFLSDO
ZLWKRXW JLYLQJ WKUHH PRQWKV QRWLFH RU
SD\
LQ
OLHX
WKHUHRI
RQ

$FFHSWDQFH
E\
&RPPLWWHH
RI
0DQDJHPHQW RQ DQG DSSURYHG
E\ WKH 6RFLHW\ %KDUWL\D 6KLNVKD 6DPLWL
RQ

+HOG
DFFHSWDQFH
RI
UHVLJQDWLRQ
EHIRUH
H[SLU\
RI
WKUHH
PRQWKV DV UHTXLUHG XQGHU UHJXODWLRQ
LV LOOHJDO ± +HQFH UHLQVWDWHPHQW RUGHUHG
6R
LW
HPHUJHV
WKDW
WKH
UHVLJQDWLRQ
VXEPLWWHG E\ WKH SHWLWLRQHU RQ
FRXOG QRW EH DFFHSWHG EHIRUH WKH H[SLU\
RI WKUHH PRQWKV DV KH KDG QHLWKHU JLYHQ
WKUHH
PRQWKV
VDODU\
QRU
KDG
WKH
PDQDJHPHQW FRPPLWWHH H[HPSWHG KLP
IURP JLYLQJ WKH QRWLFH RI WKUHH PRQWKV
7KH
ZULW SHWLWLRQ LWVHOI ZDV ILOHG RQ
 YL] EHIRUH WKH H[SLU\ RI WKUHH
PRQWKV
UHFNRQHG
IURP
WKH
GDWH
RI
UHVLJQDWLRQ GDWHG +H KDV HYHQ
PDGH D UHSUHVHQWDWLRQ WR WKH 'LVWULFW
,QVSHFWRU
RI
6FKRROV
RQ

DQQH[XUH
WR
WKH
ZULW
SHWLWLRQ
ZKHUHE\
KH
KDG
FKDOOHQJHG
WKH
DFFHSWDQFH RI WKH UHVLJQDWLRQ
,Q WKLV
YLHZ RI WKH PDWWHU KH GHVHUYHV WR EH
UHLQVWDWHG
LJQRULQJ
WKH
UHVLJQDWLRQ
OHWWHU GDWHG DQG LWV VRFDOOHG
DFFHSWDQFH E\ UHVSRQGHQW QR EHIRUH
WKH H[SLU\ RI WKUHH PRQWKV UHFNRQHG
IURP
&DVH /DZ GLVFXVVHG
 83 /%(&
 83 /%(&

By the Court

1. The petitioner has sought a
mandamus declaring the resolutions dated
21.12.92 and 11.5.93 as null and void and
that he continues to be the Principal of the
college and is entitled to his salary.

2. The case of the petitioner is that
he was the Principal of Suraj Bhan
Saraswati Vidhya Mandir, Inter College,
Shikarpur, Bulandshahr, a recognised
institution under the U.P. Intermediate
Education Act. The college is being run
by a registered society known as as
Shikarpur Shikha Kalyan Samiti. The
college was earlier a Junior High School
which was upgraded as High School in
the
year
1989
and
thereafter
as
Intermediate College. The petitioner was
the Head Master of Junior High School
and became the Head Master of High
School when it was upgraded. On up
gradation of the school as Intermediate
College he was promoted as Principal by
resolution of Managing Committee and
was confirmed on a monthly salary of
Rs.1700/-.
The
Committee
of
Management by resolution letter dated
21.12.1992 held that the petitioner had
committed
certain
irregularities
and
without affording any opportunity to him
and by letter dated 23.12.92 he was
directed not work as Principal as to give
the charge to Sri Chandra Pal Singh. He
was attached with the head office of the
Society at Vrindaban. He proceeded on