Aditi Talwar vs University Of Delhi And Ors.
2019 Latest Caselaw 1889 Del

$~54
*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                                       Date of decision: 5th April, 2019

+      W.P.(C) 12265/2018 & CM APPLs.15612-13/2019
       ADITI TALWAR                                   ..... Petitioner
                          Through:     Mr. Sourabh Ahuja, Adv.

                          versus

       UNIVERSITY OF DELHI AND ORS.           ..... Respondents

Through: Mr. Mohinder J.S. Rupal Adv.

with Mr. Prang Newmai, Adv. for University of Delhi CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR

% J U D G M E N T (ORAL)

1. On the fateful day of 15th May, 2018, the petitioner Aditi Talwar was attempting her third Generic Elective examination of the fourth semester of the B.A (Hons.) Economics course, as a student of the Shyama Prasad Mukherjee College. The examination was of three hours duration, from 3.00 p.m. to 6.00 p.m.

2. According to the averments in the writ petition, a student, seated near the petitioner, threw a spiral bound book, which fell near the petitioner's table, and, on seeing the spiral book in the vicinity of the seat of the petitioner, the Reporting Officer Ms. Chandrakanta, a teacher in the said College, questioned the petitioner regarding the same. Ms. Chandrakanta, the writ petition avers, alleged that the petitioner had been cheating from the said book, which allegation the

petitioner staunchly denied. The petitioner also made repeated requests that the answer provided in her answer sheet could be tallied with the material contained in the text book which was found near her desk, to ascertain whether she had, in fact, made any use of the material contained in the said text book.

3. Though the petitioner was permitted to undertake the remaining papers of the said fourth semester examination, a Show Cause Notice, dated 25th May, 2018, was issued to her, alleging that she had resorted to unfair means during the said examination, inviting disciplinary action under Ordinance X-A of the Ordinances governing the University of Delhi (hereinafter referred to as "the University"). The specific charge, against the petitioner, as contained in the said show cause notice, merits reproduction, in extenso, thus:

"The attention of the candidate is invited to Ordinance X-A of the University of Delhi concerning the punishment awarded for use of unfairness/disorderly conduct at the examination. He had been cautioned through the guidelines, set out under Ordinance X-A of University of Delhi and through the announcement made at the start of the paper that use of unfair means/disorderly conduct was an offence under the provisions of Ordinance X-A of the University. It had also been stated that the minimum punishment for possession unauthorised material during the course of examination was the cancellation of the entire examination (even though the material recovered has not been used during the course of the examination)

In view of the specific report of the Superintendent of the Examination Centre/Coordinator of the Central Evaluation Centre, the said candidate is now required to show cause in writing as to why disciplinary action as provided under Ordinance X-A of the University should

not be taken against him/her. His/her written reply should reach the undersigned within two weeks of issue of this Show Cause notice, failing which it will be presumed that he/she has accepted the charge conveyed to him/her and in such an event the University shall be inclined to take a decision on the basis of the facts available on record.

On receipt of the written reply or at the expiry of the above said period of two weeks, the case will be assigned to the Examination Disciplinary Committee and will be processed in accordance with the rules of the University. The final decision of the Executive Council taken in his/her case will be communicated to him/her in due course. The Examination Disciplinary Committee which would be assigned the case could also consider giving the candidate a personal hearing on a date and time so fixed by it provided that the candidate asks for it in writing.

The candidate is required to give a reference to the case number and his roll number while sending a reply to this communication or addressing any communication to the University in this behalf."

4. Ordinance X-A of the Ordinances governing the University also merits reproduction thus:

"Ord. X-A. Disorderly conduct and use of unfair means in examination.

I. For the purposes of this Ordinance-

(a) Examination means an examination conducted by the University of Delhi;

(b) The year means the academic year;

(c) Candidate includes an examinee taking any examination in a particular year and, wherever the

context so permits, every student on the rolls of the University or of a recognized College or Institution;

(d) The use of dishonest or unfair means in the examination includes;

(i) assisting in any manner whatsoever any other candidate in answering the question paper during the course of the examination;

(ii) taking assistance from any other candidate or any other person or from paper, not or other material in answering the question paper during the course of the examination;

(iii) carrying into the examination room any book, paper, notes, or other material whatsoever likely to be used directly or indirectly by the candidate in connection with the examination;

(iv) smuggling in an answer book or a continuation sheet;

(v) taking out or arranging to send out an answer book or its any page or a continuation sheet:

(vi) replacing or getting replaced an answer book or its any page or continuation sheet during or after the examination;

(vii) getting impersonated by any person in examination;

(viii) deliberately disclosing one's identity or making any distinctive mark in the answer book for that purpose;

(ix) communicating with or talking to any other candidate or unauthorised person in or around the examination room during the course of the examination;

(x) communicating or attempting to communicate directly or through a relative, guardian and friend with an examiner with the object of influencing him in the award of marks;

(e) Disorderly conduct in the examination includes;

(i) misbehaviour in connection with the examination with the Superintendent, the Invigilator on duty or the other staff working at the Examination Centre, or with any other candidate, in or around the examination centre, before, during or after the examination hour;

(ii) leaving the examination room before the expiry of half an hour or without handing over the answer book to the Invigilator-in- charge or without signing the attendance sheet;

(iii) intentionally tearing off the answer book or a part thereof or a continuation sheet;

(iv) disturbing or disrupting the examination;

(v) inciting others to leave the examination room or to disturb or disrupt the examination;

(vi) carrying into the examination centre any weapon of offence.

2. No candidate shall make use of any dishonest or unfair means or indulge in disorderly conduct in the examination.

3. A candidate found guilty of the use of dishonest or unfair means or disorderly conduct in the examination may be disqualified from passing the examination for

which he was a candidate, and may, in addition, be debarred from appearing at any future examination of the University for a further period to be stated or be expelled from the University and declared not a fit and proper person to be admitted to any further examination of the University.

4. (a) Any candidate who, in the opinion of the Invigilator on duty or the Examiner conducting a practical or oral examination or the Superintendent of the Examination Centre, contravenes or is suspected of contravening the provisions of clause 2 in the examination room, shall be forthwith challenged by such Invigilator, Examiner or Superintendent who shall ask for a signed statement from the candidate.

The candidate may be subjected to a search of his person to recover any incriminating material from him by the examination staff on duty.

(b) without prejudice to the provision contained in sub-clause (a) above the Superintendent of an Examination Centre or the Examiner conducting practical or oral examination shall also have the power to expel a candidate who in his opinion, has contravened the provisions of clause 2 from the examination centre for the remaining duration of the paper.

5 (a) The Superintendent of the Examination Centre or the Examiner or any Officer of the University, as the case may be, shall report in writing to the Controller of Examinations the case of every student who has contravened the provision of clause 2.

(b) The reporting authority shall give full facts of the case in his report and forward with it the statements, if any, made on the occasion by the candidate and the Invigilator on duty and papers, books and other material recovered from the candidate, if any.

6. There shall be one or more Examination Disciplinary Committees. Each such Committee, hereinafter referred to as the Examination Disciplinary Committee, shall be constituted as under:

(a) On the recommendation of the Vice- Chancellor the Executive Council shall, at the beginning of each year, draw up a panel of teachers of the University to be nominated on the Examination Disciplinary Committee;

(b) Each Examination Disciplinary Committee shall comprise of two teachers to be nominated by the Vice-Chancellor from amongst the panel, one of them being of the status of at least a Reader.

(c) The Controller of Examination or any person authorized by him, of the rank of not less than an Assistant Controller of Examinations, will function as non-member Secretary of the Examination Disciplinary Committee.

7. The Vice-Chairman shall determine from time to time the number of Examination Disciplinary Committees.

8. (a) The Controller of Examinations or any person authorized by him in this behalf shall communicate to the candidate, in respect of whom a report has been received pursuant to clause 5 (a), the precise nature of allegations against him and shall require him to furnish his written explanation within a stipulated period.

(b) On receipt of the explanation from the candidate or on the expiry of the period stipulated for submitting explanation if no explanation is received from him the Vice-Chancellor shall assign his case for consideration to the Examination Disciplinary Committee and where there

are more Committees than one, such Examination Disciplinary Committee as he may deem fit.

9. After considering all the material on record including the explanation, if any, submitted by the candidate, the Examination Disciplinary Committee if satisfied that the candidate is guilty of the use of dishonest or unfair means or disorderly conduct in the examination, shall recommend to the Executive Council the punishment that may be imposed on the candidate under clause 3 according to the above nature of the offence.

10. The Executive Council may, after considering the report, of the Executive Disciplinary Committee take such action against the candidate under clause 3 as it may deem fit.

11. A candidate on whom any punishment has been imposed under clause 3 may, within 30 days from the date of the receipt of the communication in that behalf, make a representation to the Vice-Chancellor for review of his case and the Vice-Chancellor, if satisfied that the case is fit for reconsideration, refer the same to the Executive Council. The Executive Council may thereupon review the case and pass such orders as it may consider fit.

12. In the case of a candidate who has been expelled from the University in terms of provisions of Clause 3, the Executive Council may, on the recommendation of the Vice-Chancellor, on the expiry of three years after such expulsion including the examination in connection with which he was punished, exempt a candidate from further operation of the punishment awarded.

13. If within four months of the publication of the results, it is brought to the notice of the Controller of Examinations that a candidate was guilty of the use of dishonest or unfair means at the examination in respect of which his result was declared, the provisions of this

Ordinance shall apply mutatis mutandis to the case of such a candidate provided that before imposing any penalty including the penalty of cancellation of his result, he shall be given another opportunity, to show cause against the proposed punishment and his explanation, if any, shall be considered by the Executive Council.

13.A. A candidate against whom an enquiry is pending about his allegedly having resorted to the use of dishonest or unfair means or disorderly conduct in the examination or against whom action is initiated under the provisions of the preceding clause shall, if he takes or has taken any subsequent examination, be deemed to have been only provisionally admitted to that subsequent examination.

That examination will stand cancelled and his result thereof would not be declared if on account of the punishment imposed on him as a result of the said enquiry or action, he would not have been entitled to take that examination but for his provisional admission thereto.

14. If a person, not otherwise covered by these provisions, is found guilty of having impersonated a candidate or of having written, outside the examination hall, an answer book or its any page or a continuation sheet which he knows or has reason to believe will be smuggled into the examination hall for the benefit of any candidate, or of having managed otherwise to replace the answer book or its any page of the candidate after the examination, he shall be disqualified from appearing in any University examination for a period to be stated. The provisions of this Ordinance relating to the manner of imposition of penalty shall, in so far as they may be applicable, apply to the case of such a person."

5. The punishments awardable to candidates, in connection with misdemeanors relating to examination undertaken by them, have been

formalized by the University in the form of "Instructions for the candidates appearing in the University examination" (hereinafter referred to as "the Instructions").

6. The misdemeanors, and the punishment attending the establishment of commission thereof, are characterized into six categories, designated as "Part-A" to "Part-F". For the purpose of this writ petition, Part-B and Part-C of the said instructions alone are relevant and may, therefore, be reproduced, in the tabular form in which they are contained in the aforementioned instructions, as under:

       Part Offence                                Punishment

       B       (i) Keeping in possession Cancellation of the

papers, books or notes or is entire examination. found having written notes on the question paper or on any part of the clothes worn by him/ her or on a part of his/ her body or table or desk or is found in possession of ruler and/or instruments like:

Set-squares, protractors, slide rules, etc. with notes written on them and which notes, papers or the material written on ruler or instrument, or on the question paper or on clothes worn by him/her or any part of his/her body, table or desk could be helpful or of assistance to him/ her in answering the paper etc. he/ she is taking or could be helpful or of assistance to him/her in

answering the paper etc. he/ she is taking or could be helpful or of assistance to other candidate in that examination hall, but the candidate has not attempted to take any assistance himself/ herself or give any assistance to any other candidate from such material.

(ii) Intentionally tearing off the answer book or a part thereof or a continuation sheet.

(iii) Deliberately disclosing his/ her identity or making any distinctive mark in the answer book for that purpose in contravention of, any general rules in this behalf.

(iv) Using abusive or obscene language in the answer book.

(v) Misbehaving in connection with the examination with the Superintendent, the Invigilator on duty and the other staff working at the Examination Centre or with any other candidate in or around the Examination Centre before, during or after the examination.

               (vi) Leaving the examination
               room before expiry of half an
               hour without the written
               permission       of       the
               Superintendent     of     the
               Examination and/ or without
               handing over the answer book
               to the Invigilator, In-charge



                and/or without signing the
               attendance sheet.
       C       (i) Keeping in possession            Cancellation of the
               papers, books or notes or is         entire examination
               found having written notes of        taken     by     the
               the question paper or on any         candidate during the
               part of the clothes worn by          year and further
               him/ her or on any part of his/      debarring him/ her
               her body or table or is found in     from appearing at
               possession of foot rule and/ or      any examination of
               instruments like setsquares,         the       University
               protractors, slide rules with        within a span period
               notes written on them and            of one year (12
               which notes papers, books or         months).
               the material written on foot rule
               or instruments, or on the
               question paper or on clothes
               worn by him/ her or any part of
               his/ her body, table or desk etc.,
               could be helpful or of
               assistance to him/ her in
               answering the paper he/ she is
               taking or could be helpful or of
               assistance to other candidates
               in that examination hall and if
               the candidate has made actual
               use of material himself/herself
               or given assistance thereof to
               any other candidate during the
               examination.
               (ii) Assisting or attempting to      Cancellation of the
               assist    in    any     manner       entire examination
               whatsoever any other candidate       taken     by     the
               in answering the question paper      candidate during the
               during the examination hours.        year and further
              (iii) Where the candidate takes       debarring him/ her
              assistance or attempts to take        from appearing at
              assistance from to other              any examination of
              candidate or any other person         the       University

or from any book, paper notes within a span period or other material in answering of one year (12 the question paper during the months). examination.

(iv) Where the answer, book of the candidate shows or otherwise established that he/ she has received or attempts to receive any help from any other candidate or any source in a mala-fide manner or has given help or attempted to give help to another candidate in a manner during the examination hours.

(v) Gross mis-behavior i.e. threatening with physical force in connection with the examination with the Superintendent, the invigilator on duty or any other staff working at the Examination Centre or with any other candidate in or around the Examination Centre, before, during or after the Examination.

(vi) Where the candidate disturbs the examination or attempts to do so.

(vii) Where the candidate on being challenged or searched during the course of examination by the Superintendent or any Invigilator or by any member of the examination staff on duty, swallows a note or paper or

runs with it or is guilty of causing disappearance or destroying any such material with the intention of obliterating the evidence of his/ her having possessed material.

7. From a reading of the above, it becomes clear that, where a candidate is found in possession of material which could be helpful or of assistance to the said candidate in the examination which is being undertaken by her/him, she/he would be liable to have the entire examination, being undertaken by her/him, cancelled. However, where a candidate is found not only to be in possession of such material, but to have " made actual use thereof", the punishment is more stringent, involving cancelling of the entire examination and further debarment of the candidate from appearing at any examination of the University within a span of one year (12 months).

8. This Court has also taken stock of the distinction between Parts- B and C of the aforementioned instructions, in its order dated 3 rd November, 2017 in W.P.(C) 9754/2017 (Madan Kumar v. University of Delhi), which reads thus:

"Petitioner, who is a student of Bachelor of Engineering, seeks issuance of a writ of certiorari in setting aside memorandum dated 25.10.2017 issued by University of Delhi.

Petitioner is undergoing the course at Netaji Subhash Institute of Technology, Dwarka, which is arrayed as respondent No.2. It is alleged that during the examination for the sixth semester, he was caught with a calculator which had some mathematical expressions

written on the back side of the cover. As per the record produced by Mr. Rupal, learned counsel for University of Delhi, such material, though relevant to the subject, was not used. Mr. Rupal, in view thereof, has no hesitation to concede to the effect that the relevant Rule attracted thereby, for punishment would be 'B', inviting punishment of cancelation of the entire exam and not 'C inviting cancellation of the entire examination taken by the candidate during the year and further debarring him from appearing at any examination of the University within a span period of one year (12 months). When that is so, the impugned punishment should, at the most, be in part 'B' only.

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, submits that the petitioner would be satisfied, if, the petition is disposed off construing the punishment to be in part 'B' and not part 'C, inasmuch as, the petitioner would be entitled to re-appear for the semester for which the punishment under part 'B' would stand concluded. On this, Ms. Ahlawat, learned counsel for the respondent No.2, submits that the petitioner can be permitted to appear for the next semester i.e. seventh semester and re-appear in the semester, for which the punishment awarded under Part 'B' is conceded to, if, the Rules of University of Delhi, so permit.

In the given facts and circumstances, as mutually agreed, the petition is disposed off in the said terms. It is, however, expected of the respondents, i.e.. University of Delhi and Netaji Subhash Institute of Technology to immediately do the needful and permit the petitioner to appear in the exam to begin on 06.11.2017, if, he is so entitled to.

Petition stands disposed off accordingly. Dasti under the signature of the Court Master."

9. In the present case, the Show Cause Notice dated 25th May, 2018 culminated in impugned memorandum dated 24th August, 2018, which invokes clause (c) of the aforementioned instructions and, under the said clause, penalizes the petitioner by cancellation of the fourth semester of the entire examination undertaken by her in May/June, 2018, and further debars her from appearing in any examination of the University within a span of 12 months.

10. It is apposite to reproduce the impugned Memorandum, dated 24th August, 2018, in extenso, thus:

"University of Delhi Examination Branch-V Delhi-110007

Case No.48 Ref. No,: Exam-V/UFM/2018/483

Roll No. 16075510001 Delhi, the 24/08/2018

Memorandum

It has already been communicated through the correspondence on the subject that as par report received from the Superintendent of the Examination Centre where Aditi Talwar has appeared at the BA (Hons) IV Sem Examination-2018, the said candidate had resorted to the use of unfair means/disorderly conduct during the aforesaid examination.

The said candidate had been issued a detailed show-cause notice on the basis of the report of the Superintendent; the report of the expert who had gone through the material recovered from his/her possession as also the statement, if given, at the time of the incident.

After having considered all documents on record including the personal hearing (if asked and granted by

the Examination Disciplinary Committee) the Executive Council of the University of Delhi having been satisfied to the findings of the Examination Disciplinary Committee has decided that for the use of unfair means/disorderly conduct, as aforesaid, the said candidate be awarded punishment under Clause C of the guidelines (circulated to him/her along with the admission ticket). The said clause reads as follows:

Clause C: Cancellation of the entire examination taken by the candidate in May/June, 2018 and further debarring him/her from appearing at any examination of the university within a span period of one year (12 months).

In consequence of the above decision of the Executive Council, Aditi Talwar is hereby disqualified from passing the examination taken by him/her Roll No. 16075510001 and is further debarred from appearing at any examination of the University of Delhi, until the Semester Examination of 2019 in consequence of this decision, the said candidate would be eligible to be admitted at the same examination to be held in May/June 2019, only if otherwise eligible.

The said candidate should also further note that in consequence of this decision, he/she would not be eligible to attend any classes in the College/institution either for the same or higher class nor he/she will be entitled to claim any benefit of any classes attended despite clear instructions contained in this letter.

Sd/-

Deputy Registrar (Secrecy)"

11. The petitioner also preferred an appeal against the aforementioned Memorandum dated 24th August, 2018 (supra), which was dismissed, by the University, vide Memorandum dated 18th

October, 2018, which is also impugned.

12. It is significant to note that, neither in the Show Cause Notice dated 25th May, 2018, nor in the Memorandum dated 24th August, 2018 (supra) nor in the appellate Order dated 18th October, 2018, passed by the University, is there to be found any specific allegation, far less any finding, that the petitioner had actually made use of the material found in her possession.

13. The counter affidavit, filed by the University, submits that, consequent to the issuance of the Show Cause Notice dated 25th May, 2018, issued to the petitioner, the matter was referred to an expert, "who had opined that after perusal of the material on record, it was found that the same was relevant in almost all the questions and that the same may be used for reference".

14. The counter-affidavit filed by the University, too, does not allege that the petitioner had actually been found to have used the material contained in the spiral book which was found in her vicinity/possession.

15. During the pendency of these proceedings, the petitioner was permitted to appear in her fifth semester examination, but without creating any equities thereby. She has, thereafter, also attended her sixth semester classes of the B.A.(Hons.) Economics Course in the Shyama Prasad Mukherjee College.

16. Though the writ petition, needless to say, seeks to dispute the very allegation that the petitioner was found in possession of the spiral textbook, or that she had nothing to do with the said text book, it would not be possible for this Court, in exercise of its writ jurisdiction, to enter into such a debate, which would essentially involve disputed issues of fact.

17. Cognizant thereof, Mr. Saurabh Ahuja, learned counsel for the petitioner, has, advisedly, restricted the relief sought by his client, in the present case, to coverage of the case of his client, Part-B of the Instructions, rather than Part-C thereof. If this were allowed, needless to say, the petitioner would suffer forfeiture of all the papers undertaken by her under the fourth semester and would, therefore, have to undertake all the papers all over again, in accordance with the applicable instructions and guidelines in that regard, but would not stand debarred from appearing in future semesters.

18. Mr. Rupal, learned counsel appearing for the University of Delhi, with his customary fairness, acknowledges the distinction between Part- B and Part- C of instructions, as well as the contents of para 10 of his counter affidavit.

19. Mr. Rupal has handed over, across the bar, a copy of the relevant passages from the spiral text book which was found in the possession of the petitioner, as well as the answers given by her, which formed the fulcrum of the decision to penalize the petitioner. In the interests of confidentiality, I do not deem it appropriate to

reproduce the said passages. Suffice it to state that, having perused the said material, I am satisfied that the stand taken in para 10 of the counter affidavit reveals the actual position, i.e. that though the material found in the petitioner's possession may have been useful to her in answering the questions in the examination, the answer given by her does not reflect "copy", or reproduction, verbatim, or even substantially, of the passage contained in the said text book.

20. In view of the fact that possession of material which could be useful to a student, and possession of such material coupled with actual usage by such student, visit the student with different penalties, as per the instructions of the University, of which the latter penalty is far more stringent than the former, it is obvious that, if the University is invoking the latter penalty (contained in Part-C of the instructions), against the student, in preference to the lesser punishment under Part- B, it would be necessary for the University to establish, positively, that the student had actually made use of the material found in her/his possession.

21. Not only is such positive evidence not forthcoming, either in the Show Cause Notice dated 25th May, 2018, or in the consequent punishment Order dated 24th August, 2018, or even in the appellate Order dated 18th October, 2018, in the present case the averment in para 10 of the counter affidavit would also seem to militate against such assumption.

22. At the cost of repetition, I may mention that a perusal of the

material found in the petitioner's possession, vis-à-vis, the answer given by her would also discountenance the possibility of any positive conclusion that the petitioner had actually made use of the material in her possession.

23. In such circumstances, I am of the view that the decision, of the University, to invoke, against the petitioner, the extreme penalty relatable to Part-C of the instructions, is not justifiable.

24. At the same time, I do not deem it appropriate to allow the petitioner to dispute, all over again, the fact of her having been found in possession of the spiral text book in question, especially as, during the pendency of these proceedings, the petitioner has already attempted her fifth semester papers, and is at the threshold of attempting her sixth semester papers.

25. It would be appropriate, in these circumstances, that a quietus to this issue is achieved at this stage.

26. In view thereof, I deem it appropriate, in the interests of justice, to set aside the impugned Order dated 25th May, 2018, the consequent punishment Order dated 24th August, 2018, and the appellate Order dated 18th October, 2018, whereby the petitioner had been awarded the penalty relatable to Part-C of the instructions, i.e. the penalty of cancellation of the entire fourth semester examination along with debarment from undertaking any other examination for a period of one year, and substituting, instead with the penalty relatable to Part-B

thereof, i.e. cancellation of the entire examination of the fourth semester alone.

27. The petitioner would, accordingly, stand visited with the penalty of cancellation of the entire fourth semester examination of the B.A.(Hons.) course which was being undertaken by her.

28. The results of the fifth semester examination, already undertaken by the petitioner, are accordingly, directed to be released. The petitioner is also being permitted to undertake the sixth semester examination of the B.A. (Hons.) programme being undertaken by her in due course.

29. This would, needless to say, be subject to the petitioner qualifying for undertaking the said sixth semester examination, in accordance with the rules and regulations governing the same.

30. Needless to say, the petitioner would also have to undertake her fourth semester examination all over again, in accordance with the rules and regulations applicable in that regard.

31. In case the petitioner is found eligible to appear in the sixth semester examination, the University is also directed to permit her to fill in the appropriate form for the said purpose and to release her the admit card.

32. The writ petition stands allowed to the above extent, with no order as to costs.

Dasti.

C. HARI SHANKAR, J APRIL 05, 2019 dsn