Dr. Kuldeep Verma And Ors. vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors.
2002 Latest Caselaw 990 Del

JUDGMENT

Manmohan Sarin, J.

1. Petitioners numbering 23, who are Doctors, holding MBBS Degrees and are the applicants for admission to MD/MS and MDS courses, had taken All India Post Graduate Medical Entrance Examination-2002, for short (AIPGMEE-2002), conducted by All India Institute of Medical Sciences (hereinafter referred to as 'AIIMS'), respondent No. 2, herein. AIPGMEE-2002 examination is conducted by AIIMS, pursuant to the directions given by the Supreme Court, for admission to 25% seats in various Post Graduate Courses i.e. MD/MS/PG/Diploma and MDS, in medical colleges all over the country.

2. Petitioners by this writ petition seek a direction for quashing the results of AIPGMEE, 2002, held on 6th January, 2002. A writ in the nature of mandamus is sought to direct respondent No. 2, to hold the examination afresh. Further, a writ or direction is sought, commanding respondent No. 3, C.B.I. to enquire into what is alleged to be the admission scam relating to leakage and sale of question paper of the said examination and to bring the culprits to justice. Status report is also sought to be submitted with regard to investigation relating to the arrest on 4th February, 2002 of Pawan Thakur and others, in connection with the advertisement of guaranteed admission to MD/MS and other course and charges of sale of question paper.

3. Petitioners' case is that they along with many other students had been approached by hitherto unknown persons, who offered to sell them question paper of AIPGMEE-2002, for a consideration of Rs. 75,000/-. One or two sample solved questions were also shown to the petitioners. The petitioners claim that they refused to buy the question papers, but there were many who purchased these question papers. It is stated that when on 6th January, 2002, petitioners appeared in the examination, they found that the question paper was the same as the one, which was being sold prior to the examination, as was evident from the sample questions that had been shown to them by the said unknown persons.

4. Petitioners also rely on an advertisement that appeared in the newspaper prior to the examination, inviting students to get guaranteed admissions into medical course. Respondent No. 2 i.e. AIIMS had filed a complaint with the police. As a result of the raid conducted in the office of the advertiser, one Pawan Thakur and his three associates were arrested. Post-dated cheques worth Rs. 1,60,00,000/- were recovered along with photocopies of admit cards of 9 doctors for AIPGMEE, along with agreements that had been entered into by aspirant doctors etc. Pawan Thakur was offering to sell the question paper for AIPGMEE for Rs. 10 lacs. The modus operandi of Pawan Thakur was that a candidate interested in purchasing the question paper was not required to make any advance cash payment. Post dated cheque was only required to be given. The solved question paper was to be given on the eve of the date of examination. Upon the candidate being satisfied that question paper as given in the examination was the very question paper that had been solved and shown the candidate was required to make cash payment and take back the post-dated cheque. The petitioners claim that unless Pawan Thakur and his associates had access to the actual question paper, he could not have carried out this exercise of running an office in Delhi, taking out advertisement in newspaper. Besides qualified doctors were not expected to pay such hefty amounts unless they were certain that the actual question paper would be made available.

5. Petitioners submit that they had made representations to respondent No. 2 about the sale of question papers before the Examination and requested them to enquire into the matter before declaring the results. Petitioners claim that the results as declared have vindicated their position and confirmed their belief about the leakage of question paper. Petitioners state that 7 of first 10 positions in the AIPGMEE have gone to King George Medical College, Lucknow and GVSM Medical College, Kanpur. 70 students of King George Medical College are stated to have been successful in the examination. All the 7 candidates, who have secured a position in the first 10 top position also appeared from the centres in Lucknow. It is claimed that the candidates with dismal or average educational and academic background have obtained exceptionally high rank in AIPGMEE-2002. Petitioners, therefore, claim that the sanctity of the examination system has been violated. Some colleagues of the petitioners and many other candidates at other centres across the country, had procured solved question paper. The question paper, it is claimed, had leaked in Delhi and Lucknow and was sold at Rs. 10.5 lacs each. The complaints to the Authorities had not resulted or yielded any results, even though they were encouraged initially by the following statement made b Union Minister of Health "All those who have gained admission into the MD courses after paying money will take bribe all their lives. This in not correct and we will take action against all those who have done so".

6. Notice to show cause in the writ petition was issued on 5.3.2002. Counter affidavits have been filed by respondent No. 2 AIIMS as well as by Union of India. The matter was under investigation by the Economic Wing of Crime Branch, Delhi Police, who investigated the case registered against Pawan Thakur and others. Status reports were called for. Counsel for the parties were heard and judgment was reserved on 30.5.2002.

7. It may also be noticed that writ petitions had also been filed in the High Court of Allahabad and Patna. A Learned Single Judge in Allahabad had stayed the counselling which was being carried out pursuant to the declaration of results on 15.2.2002. The Division Bench of Allahabad High Court in Special Appeal No. 37/2002 had, however, modified the order leaving it open to the AIIMS to conduct the counselling and to goon with the process of provisional admission subject to outcome of the writ petition. A transfer petition had also been moved by the AIIMS before the Supreme Court for transfer of the pending writ petitions in Allahabad High Court and Patna High Court to this Court. Notice was issued in the Transfer Petition and pending notice proceedings in the High Court of Allahabad and Patna were stayed.

8. In the counter affidavit filed by AIIMS, it is claimed that the present petition as filed is a vague one and based on conjectures. Petitioners have not disclosed their sources of information or identified those persons who had offered to sell the question paper. One of the petitioners, it is claimed, was not even an applicant in the examination. It is stated that there is no commonality of interest between 23 petitioners who are from different States. The petition was filed belatedly on 4.3.2002, even though the result was declared as far back as 15.2.2002. It is claimed that vague and vexatious allegations have been made based on unconfirmed newspaper report. It is stated that AIIMS itself was committed to maintain the sanctity of the examination. On noticing the advertisement, which had appeared in the newspaper on 29.12.2001, seeking to offer confirmed admissions in medical courses, the Institute promptly acted and complained to the police. As a result, a dummy candidate was sent to the said advertiser on the basis of an admit card and roll number issued by AIIMS. A raid was conducted by Delhi Police, which resulted in the arrest of Pawan Thakur and his associates with recoveries of post dated cheques of Rs. 1,60,00,000/- and agreements entered into with the Doctors and students. Photocopiers of admit cards and roll numbers and other documents were also seized and recovered.

9. Learned counsel Mr. Mukul Gupta painstakingly urged that there was no cogent or reliable evidence, showing the leakage of the question paper before 6.1.2002. The petitioners and others have belatedly complained, after the publication of results. Petition is a manifestation of the frustration of those not being successful or getting the requisite marks in the merit list for the course desired to be pursued by them. Mr. Gupta also relying on the results as published submitted that the pass percentage of candidates from Lucknow and Kanpur Centres, in fact has suffered a drop from 12.61% to 8.21%. The overall percentage of students passing from King George Medical College of Lucknow has also dropped from the previous year. The overall success rate in Delhi and Lucknow has been a mere 6.78% and 8.21%. This, as per the AIIMS, should dispel any claim of mass leakage or availability of question papers prior to 6.1.2002 in Delhi and Lucknow. Counsel also submitted that some of the allegations were incredible inasmuch as it was alleged that while paper was offered to the petitioners at Rs. 75,000/- it is also alleged that it was sold in Delhi at Rs. 10 lacs. Obviously, there could not be so much of disparity in prices between Delhi and UP. The photo copy of the question paper, which has also been filed or published has been done after publication of results on 15.2.2002. The photocopy of the question paper suffered on 26.2.2002. Relying on Subhash Chandra Verma v. State of Bihar reported at 1995 Supp. (1) Supreme Court Cases 325, it is urged that photocopy belatedly produced has no evidentiary value.

10. The Union of India filed its affidavit, wherein it is averred that as per the scheme approved by the Supreme Court in the case of Dr. Dinesh Kumar v. Moti Lal Nehru College, Allahabad, reported at AIR 1986 Supreme Court 1877, the responsibility for conducting All India Post Graduate Entrance Examination, for admission to the 25% seats in MD/MS/Diploma and MDS in various Medical/Dental Colleges of the country, has been entrusted upon the AIIMS. Respondent No. 2 herein conducts the said examination every year and forwards the merit list to Director General of Health Services for allocation of colleges and courses. The Director General Health Services allocates the courses/colleges by personal appearance of the candidates through counselling in order of merit. It is stated that the counselling was suspended on 8.3.2002 following the orders of Allahabad High Court and has not been resumed since then.

11. Delhi Police had submitted a status report with regard to the investigation carried out. During the course of proceedings, the petitioners had also disclosed the names of some of the successful candidates with whom the question paper had been seen, prior to the examination. Petitioners also furnished the name of the gate keeper/peon of S.P. Hospital at Lucknow, who was suspected to be the go between These names were duly furnished by the counsel to the Investigating Officer of Crime Branch, Delhi Police, who are investigating the case of Pawan Thakur in FIR No. 17/2002 dated 4.1.2002 under Sections 420/511/474/120-BIPC Police Station Kalka Ji, Delhi. The sub-dean Examination Prof. Gupta of AIIMS also explained to the court in Chamber, the entire process of paper setting, printing and transportation of the question papers and holding of the examination, the safety precautions taken for conduct of the examination. In particular, the process of sealing and locking of the boxes, containing question papers, their transportation and arrangements at various examination centres. From the system, as explained, it is seen that even the faculty members, who are involved initially in giving suggested questions for the question paper in respect of their individual disciplines, are not aware of what eventually would be asked in the question paper. The confidentiality of printer is also maintained. The suggested questions only form the data bank. Besides the trunks containing the question papers are locked with two locks and a faculty member of the All India Medical Sciences Institute accompanies the said question papers locked in trunks. They are opened in the presence of the faculty members and supervisor of the concerned examination centre. Different sets of question papers are prepared containing the same questions in a jumbled up manner. This is to prevent copying by the persons immediately behind or in the vicinity in the examination hall. Prima facie, reasonable precaution and care appears to be taken. However, it appears that there are far too many examination centres and cities, where examination is held thereby causing problems of management. Possibilities of risk of leakage, enhance due to interaction with a large number of persons. I shall advert to this aspect later.

12. The Crime Branch of Delhi Police after investigation in the Pawan Thakur case as well as based on the leads given during the progress of the writ petition by the petitioners has not yet found any evidence of leakage of question paper. AIIMS has also furnished the analysis of results of the examination giving the statistics of results in the past as well as the current year, showing the various facets of performance as compared to the previous years, in particular, with reference to the centres at Lucknow. AIIMS maintain that they have looked into the entire matter and found no evidence of leakage and sale of question paper prior to the examination.

13. The Solicitor General of India was also requested to appear and assist the Court in this matter. Mr. Harish Salve, Solicitor General appeared and addressed the Court on various aspects. As a result of his intervention, the Union of India also constituted a Committee comprising Dr. J.S. Bapna, Director IHBAS, Delhi, Dr. D.C. Jain, Vice Principal, Vardhman Medical College, New Delhi and Dr. Nirmal Kumar Professor, G.B. Pant Hospital, New Delhi, who interviewed and met the successful candidates, who secured the seven out the top 10 position from the Lucknow Centres with a view to interact with them and make an assessment of their knowledge. The report of the Committee has also been placed before the Court to which I shall advert later.

14. During the course of proceedings a number of applications were also received for intervention by the candidates, who had either been selected in the counselling or by those who were affected by the suspension of counselling. Mr. Manoj K. Dass for the applicants in C.M. No. 3659/02 and 4834/02 as well as Mr. Salman Khurshid, Sr. Advocate with Mr. R.K. Khanna for the applicants in C.M. No. 4997/2002 were also heard. An application C.M. No. 6230/2002 was also moved by Mr. M.C. Dhingra, Advocate after the judgment had been reserved on 30.5.2002. The said application was disposed of as having become infructuous.

15. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner Mr. P.N. Lekhi submitted that this was a case where the investigating agencies failed to effectively investigate, despite the petitioners at the peril of being harmed by the Mafia and those involved in the leakage of question papers, had given leads and the names of the persons with whom the question had been seen prior to the examination. He submitted that the raid by the Delhi Police has resulted in putting a lid on the conspiracy rather than unearthing and exposing the racket. He also laid considerable emphasis on the fact that 7 out of 10 top candidates/doctors, securing top positions were from the Lucknow centres, which was clearly indicative of their being something remiss. He submitted that the arrest of Pawan Thakur with three others, coupled with the first 7 positions and large number of successful candidates, who appeared from Lucknow centres and photo copy of the question paper being filed on record, all tend to support the conclusion that there was leakage of the question paper. He submitted that the sanctity and purity of the examination process must be maintained and it should not be allowed to be degenerated into a commercial venture.

Mr. Lekhi urged that AIIMS instead of properly investigating and conducting a thorough investigation into the leakage of question paper had adopted an adversarial stand by raising objections to the maintainability of the writ petition, alleging failure on the part of petitioners to furnish complete and detailed particulars with regard to leakage of question paper. He submitted that direct evidence of leakage of question paper is hardly ever available.

16. Let us analyze the facts and evidence as available in respect of the alleged leakage of question paper.

(1) The examination for AIPGMEE-2002 had been conducted in 15 cities with 61 centres of which 9 were in Delhi. There were 4 centres in Lucknow. A total number of 34452 applicants had applied for the examination. 30515 students appeared in the examination. The examination was conducted on 6.1.2002. The results were announced on 15.2.2002. Curiously seven out of first 10 positions have gone to the candidates from GSVM Medical College, Kanpur and King George Medical College, Lucknow who had all appeared from the examination centres at Lucknow. An analysis of the attempted answers to the question papers of those who secured the top seven positions shows that they had given correct answers ranging from 230 to 237 of 300 questions. Percentage of marks secured was between 71 to 74.9 per cent. AIIMS in the statistics provided, attempted to show that the success rate of King George College, Lucknow, in fact, dropped from 23.33% in the year 2001 to 18.30% in 2002 and the success rate of Lucknow city had also dropped from the previous year. Be it may, one fact, which clearly emerges is that never before in the history of AIPGMEE examination, the first 7 positions out of 10 been secured by the candidates appearing from Centres in Lucknow. Respondents referred to the case of one of the candidates who secured 2nd rank, being a student of King George Medical College, Lucknow. His younger brother also appeared in the examination, but could not even qualify. Respondents submit that if at all the elder brother had access to the question paper, it is highly unlikely that the younger brother would not have received the benefit of the same. It is not the case of petitioners that all the 7 candidates had access to the question paper prior to the examination. It could be some out of the seven.

AIIMS also state that they have not found any commonality of correct answers in the answer sheets as submitted. It may also be noted that GSVM Medical College, Kanpur which has produced three candidates in the first 10 positions has not had such a distinction of producing even a single candidate in the top 10 positions for the years for which statistics have been made available in the past. King George Medical College, which has produced 4 candidates securing positions in the first 10 and 15 positions in the top 100 was not so lucky in the previous years 2001 and 2000 when only 9 students and 10 students respectively secured a position in the top 100. The figures with regard to securing a position in the top 10 have not been made available. Considering all factors, the factum of seven candidates from King George Medical College, Lucknow and GSVM Medical College Kanpur and all from the Lucknow Centre securing position in top ten is a highly unusual phenomenon, especially when at least three of them were not possessed of outstanding academic credentials, in consonance with the top position.

(II) A photo copy of the actual question paper containing 269 questions of AIPGMEE-2002 examination has been filed on record by the petitioners. It commences from question No. 13 and continues up to question No. 279. It appears that since the question paper had 300 questions, the first 1 to 12 questions and question Nos. 280 to 300 are missing. The procedure of the examination is that the question papers are made available to the candidates along with the answer sheet. The question papers along with the answer sheets after being attempted are required to be handed over to the Investigators. AIIMS claim that Investigators were instructed to keep a strict vigil and ensure that question paper or pages there from and answer sheet are not removed or taken away by candidate. As noticed, the question papers are provided in multiple sets having the same questions in jumbled up fashion. The photo copy of question paper before us is the one which has 3 stars. The availability of the question paper has not been explained by the respondents, as all question papers are required to be handed back by the candidate. AIIMS had not reported any case where the candidate had either torn the first and last sheet of question paper or where the question paper had not been returned by the candidate. Of course, it is a massive exercise to confirm that all the candidates had returned the question papers. However, till date from none of the centres any report of torn question paper or question paper having not been handed over, has been received. AIIMS are reported to have checked over around 30,000 question papers. In these circumstances, the availability of photo copy of the question paper has not been explained by the respondents. The only explanation attempted is that it could have been torn off by a candidate, who has returned the answer sheet with the first and the last sheet. The said candidate has not yet been identified as no case or omission has been reported or discovered from any of the centres. This photo copy is stated to have been also received by one of the journalist in the mail box of a newspaper. The photo copy of question paper has been attempted to be solved. In these circumstances, the question which arises for consideration is could the photo copy of question paper filed, be the copy of a question paper that had been leaked?

(III) AIIMS on noticing the advertisement that had appeared in the Hindustan Times on 29.12.2001 in the name of Shiksha Consultants Pvt. Ltd. offering confirmed admissions in MD/MS courses, lodged a complaint with the Economic Offences Wing of the Crime Branch, Delhi Police. Accordingly, a trap was set, a decoy doctor with dummy card and roll number of AIIMS was sent to the said Shiksha Consultants Pvt. Ltd. Pawan Thakur on perusing the admission ticket and after satisfying himself with the credentials of the decoy customer demanded Rs. 10.5 lacs from the said decoy customer Dr. V.S. Dalal who was also asked to sign an agreement on a non-judicial stamp paper. On a signal given by the decoy customer, raiding party seized the documents including the cheques and agreement signed by the decoy customer, Pawan Thakur was arrested. The premises were searched. Photo copies of admission cards of 9 doctors for AIPGMEE-2002 examination and cheques worth Rs. One Crore and sixty lacs were recovered. 8 agreements were also recovered and seized. Pawan Thakur during the interrogation disclosed the names of his three associates who were staying in a hotel at Paharganj and who had promised to make available the question paper on the eve of the scheduled date of examination. A raid was conducted when the three named associates were apprehended and rubber stamps of various educational institutions, photo copy of admit cards for MD/MS Entrance examination, two cheques worth Rs. 9 lacs and certain articles were also seized. The three associates of Pawan Thakur disclosed that the question paper and solution thereto was to be made available by two persons, namely, Rajiv and Raju of Patna on the evening of 5.1.2002. The Investigating Officer had visited Patna and photographs of the suspected persons in Patna were also collected. However, they are yet to be arrested or identified. The Doctors and the guardians who had entered into agreement with Pawan Thakur submitted that they had to report to Pawan Thakur with cash, who would have taken the candidate and the attendant to an undisclosed place where question paper was to be given and upon payment of cash, the post dated cheque was to be returned. A part charge sheet has been filed by the police. The Investigating Officer in FIR No. 17/2002 of 4.1.2002 under Sections 420/511/474/120B IPC P.S. Kalkaji, made further investigation on the basis of the details furnished by the petitioners in the case. The investigation conducted by the Investigating Officer at Sardar Patel Hostel Kasturba Gandhi Medical College and other places have not so far revealed any foul play or leakage of question paper prior to the date of examination. Three doctors who had entered into agreement with Pawan Thakur for supply of question paper, failed in the examination. AIIMS and Delhi Police urge that Pawan Thakur was heading a fraudulent set up to cheat gullible aspirants i.e. the Doctors and students. He did not have access to any question paper. At best he may be attempting and procuring paid seats in private colleges.

(IV) Another circumstances, which deserves to be noticed for a possible confirmation and further probe and investigation is that one Dr. Gurbaksh Singh, Medical Director of Guru Nanak Eye Centre, Preet Vihar had on 6.3.2001 lodged a complaint with Delhi Police, stating that he had received a call from a person, who had demanded substantial sum of money for guaranteed admission to his son. Dr. Gurbaksh Singh had a caller identification facility. He had been able to trace the number in question. He had filed a complaint with Delhi Police and they were able to trace the number, as belonging to one Dr. Rajiv Ranjan Kumar and Dr. Ranjeet Kumar of New Delhi. Dr. Gurbaksh Singh had approached the High Court, seeking revaluation of his son's answer sheet. The writ petition and LPA were dismissed on the ground that it was possibly a ransom call and he had to file a complaint and writ petition was not maintainable. Mr. Lekhi during the course of his submission mentioned that a possible link of Dr. Rajiv, who had called Dr. Gurbaksh Singh, assuring admission on payment of guaranteed sum of money with Rajeev from Patna named by associates of Pawan Thakur needs to be probed to see if there was any link between the two.

17. I have noted somewhat in detail the above facts and circumstances. Any leakage of a question paper or a conspiracy therefore is always shrouded in secrecy. It is very rare that one would find or come across direct evidence, unless the conspiracy is unearthed leading to a full disclosure. In the instant case, irrespective of the presentation of statistics in a manner, showing that there is a drop in the overall pass percentage or in total number of candidates appearing, a glaring fact, which stares in the eye is that never before in the history of AIPGMEE examination, the first 7 positions have been secured by those appearing from Lucknow and that too from two colleges, namely, K.G. Medical College, Lucknow and GSVM College, Kanur. It is indeed an unusual co-incidence that has happened. This coupled with the arrest of Pawan Thakur, who had taken out an advertisement and from whom post dated cheques worth Rs. 1.60 crores were recovered are indicative of a conspiracy for leakage of question paper of AIPGMEE. Moreover, the arrest of three associates of Pawan Thakur from a hotel in Pahar Ganj, who were to receive from their sources in Patna the question paper on the eve of the examination, again have a ring and an earthy sense of reality. It cannot be simply washed away as a case of an unscrupulous agency trying to dupe unsuspected aspirants to admission to Medical Colleges, who were willing to pay handsome amounts. Lastly, the availability of the actual question paper, photocopy of which has been foiled on record. The cumulative effect of all the above circumstances is that there has been a lapse and circumstances are suggestive of the existence of a conspiracy and a racket for leak and sale of the question paper for AIPGMEE-2002 among others.

18. Purely, as a legal issue, AIIMS have submitted that as a result of the investigation into the probe, a racket of a private agency, duping innocent aspirants to medical seats has been unearthed. Moreover, they have relied on a case of Amit Aggarwal, who has secured 1st division and his real brother, who failed to make it to show that if indeed the elder brother had access to the paper, the younger brother could not have been denied the benefit. Moreover, on the advice of the Solicitor General, an independent committee of highly qualified doctors and experts in their field, who were not belonging to the AIIMS, was constituted by the Union of India. One of them is the Director of Institute of Human behaviors and Allied Sciences, Delhi. The Committee interacted with candidates, who have secured Ist, IInd, IIIrd, IVth, VIth and VIIIth position. The Committee after an interaction with individual candidates, while noting the limitations of assessment in an interaction found the candidates to have reasonably good knowledge in the field.

19. As regards the approach adopted in appreciating the evidence and coming to the conclusion as to whether there has been adoption of unfair means or the examination process has been vitiated or not, reference may be invited to the judgment of the Supreme Court in Maharashtra State Board of Secondary And Higher Secondary Education v. K.S. Gandhi and Ors. . The Supreme Court observed that, "normally it is within the jurisdiction of the domestic tribunal to decide all relevant questions in the light of the evidence adduced before them. In the matter of adoption of unfair means that direct evidence may sometime be available but cases may arise where direct evidence is not available and the question will have to be considered in the light of the probabilities and circumstantial evidence."

The Supreme Court observed in para 37 as under:

"In grave cases like forgery, fraud, conspiracy, misappropriation etc. seldom direct evidence would be available. Only the circumstantial evidence would furnish the proof. In our considered view inference from the evidence and circumstances must be carefully distinguished from conjectures or speculation. The mind is prone to take pleasure to adapt circumstances to one another and even in straining them a little to force them to form parts of one connected whole. There must be evidence direct or circumstantial to deduce necessary inferences in proof of the facts in issue. There can be no inferences unless there are objective facts, direct or circumstantial from which to infer the other fact which is sought to establish. In some cases the other facts can be inferred, as much as in practical, as if they had been actually observed. In other cases the inferences do not go beyond reasonable probability. If there are no positive proved facts, oral documentary or circumstantial from which the inferences can be made the method of inference fails and what is left is mere speculation on conjecture. Therefore, when an inference of proof that a fact in dispute has been held established there must be some material facts or circumstances on record from which such an inference could be drawn. The standard of proof is not proof beyond reasonable doubt "but" the preponderance of probabilities tending to draw an inference that the fact must be more probable. Standard of proof cannot be put in a strait-jacket formula. No mathematical formula could be laid on degree of proof. The probative value could be gauged from facts and circumstances in a given case. The standard of proof is the same both in civil cases and domestic enquiries."

20. Applying the principles initiated by the Supreme Court and on consideration of the facts and circumstances and factors enumerated, I am of the view that though there are circumstances suggestive of leakage of the question paper, however, it cannot be said with certainty that there has been wide spread leakage of the question paper which has materially effected results of AIPGMEE examination-2002. I cannot be oblivious to and overlook the fact that the career and fate of thousands of students and doctors is involved who are midway in the counselling which is going on. There are deserving candidates from different colleges and States where thee has been no complaint or any prima facie evidence of suggested leakage despite the availability of modern means of communication and information technology. There is no sufficient, definite and conclusive evidence yet available on the basis of which the results of the entire examination as declared could be cancelled or quashed. Even if there is a probability of leakage of question paper prior to 6.1.2002, it cannot be said that it has materially and in a substantial manner affected the examination or the results. The option of holding examination for a limited number of students, who had successfully qualified. from the Lucknow Centre had also been considered. Here again in the ultimate analysis in the absence of sufficient and definite material, which is not yet available to show that the result of the examination has been affected, the option cannot be exercised. Apart from the complexities, it may create in terms of comparative assessment of two examinations. Especially keeping in view the factors, such as, the report of the Committee which interacted with the successful candidates in the top 10 position, I find that it would not be appropriate to hold the examination afresh even for Lucknow Centre.

21. The sanctity and purity of the examination system and educational standard has to be retained at all costs. Unfortunately, even after the efforts put in by the Crime branch of Delhi Police they appear to have reached a dead and without any breakthrough. There are sufficient loose ends to be tied and leads to be thoroughly pursued and brought to a logical culmination. I am, therefore, of the view that the appropriate course of action, which commends to the Court is to direct a thorough probe by the Central Bureau of Investigation into the entire issue of the suspected leakage of question paper under the direct supervision of a person not lower than the rank of a Joint Director of Central Bureau of Investigation. Ordered accordingly.

Without in any manner circumscribing or restricting the scope of investigation, CBI may consider for investigation the points noted in para 16 and also consider some of the following facets and aspects enumerated below:

(i) Thee has been no breakthrough with regard to the identity o the persons from Patna who were allegedly to supply the solved question paper to the associates of Pawan Thakur who were staying in a hotel at Paharganj, New Delhi.;

(ii) There has been till now no satisfactory explanation available as to how the photo copy of the question paper has become available widely;

(iii) it has to be investigated and determined as to how the question paper/photo copy of the same became available. Was it result of the leakage of the question paper or any particular candidate had not returned the question paper to the invigilator? The candidate who is responsible must be identified and action taken.

(iv) CBI may even consider the forensic examination of photo copy to ascertain and determine its source by matching it with part of the original question paper, if available.

(v) The CBI shall be free to investigate and look into all aspects of the allegations regarding leakage of the question paper and for this purpose to examine all those involved including public servants and go into the entire process of setting up of the question paper, holding and conduct of the examination with a view to determine and identify the cause of leakage, if any.

(vi) CBI shall also take over and further investigate case registered vide FIR No. 17/2002 dated 4.1.2002 under Sections 420/511/474/120-BIPC. Police station Kalka Ji, Delhi to fully unearth the conspiracy and bring to justice all those, who may be involved in the commission of offences, as may be found in further investigation.

(vii) CBI is directed to carry out thorough investigation and probe and file a status report before the Court within three months from today. In case, it is found that any of the candidates who has secured admission and qualified in the AIPGMEE-2000 examination on account of any unfair means or leakage of question paper, the said admission will be subject to the outcome of the investigation as done by the CBI and further directions of the Court.

All India Institute of Medical Sciences may also examine the feasibility of conducting the AIPGMEE examination only in the metropolitan cities so as to have effective management and control. The Director General of Health Services may resume the counselling and complete the same expeditiously so as to ensure that the quota of 25% All India seats is not surrendered.

The writ petition is disposed of in the above terms.