Ramswaroop vs Rajasthan University Of Health ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 5151 Raj

[2023/RJJD/015670]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4017/2023

Ramswaroop S/o Shri Surja Ram, Aged About 21 Years, Nandiya Parbhavati, Tehsil Bhopalgarh, District Jodhpur (Raj.).

----Petitioner Versus

1. Rajasthan University Of Health Sciences, Jaipur, Through Its Registrar, Sector -18, Kumbha Marg, Pratap Nagar, Tonk Road, Jaipur.

2. The Deputy Registrar, Rajasthan University Of Health Sciences, Jaipur, Sector -18, Kumbha Marg, Pratap Nagar, Tonk Road, Jaipur.

3. The Controller Of Examination, Rajasthan University Of Health Sciences, Jaipur, Sector -18, Kumbha Marg, Pratap Nagar, Tonk Road, Jaipur.

4. The Principal, Shree R.s,. Vishnoi Memorial B.sc.nursing College, Sector-B, First Phase, Madhuban, Saraswati Nagar, Jodhpur.

                                                                 ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)          :    Mr. Mahaveer Bishnoi
For Respondent(s)          :    Dr. Mohit Singhvi

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

Judgment

Reserved on 15/05/2023 Pronounced on 24/05/2023

1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India has been preferred claiming the following reliefs:

"It is therefore, most humbly prayed that this writ petition may kindly be allowed with cost and by and appropriate writ, order or direction; (i) the impugned letter dated 01.08.2022 (Annex.5) may kindly be quashed and set aside.(ii) the respondent University may kindly be

[2023/RJJD/015670] (2 of 7) [CW-4017/2023]

directed to accept the examination form of the petitioner for B.Sc. Nursing Part-II in pursuance of letter dated 04.03.2023 (Annex.7) and further permitted the petitioner to appear in this examination and (iii) the respondent University may kindly be also directed after appearing in B.Sc. Nursing Part-II examination if petitioner declared pass then they issued the mark sheet and degree of B.Sc. Nursing to the petitioner.

Any other appropriate writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner.

Costs of the writ petition may kindly be awarded to the petitioner."

2. As per the pleaded facts, in the year 2018, the petitioner

took admission in the respondent no.4-College to pursue B.Sc.

Nursing Course. Though the petitioner got supplementary in the

first year examination of the Course, but he was declared

successful in the examination in April, 2021; thereafter, the

petitioner started undertaking the studies in the second year of

the said Course. Subsequently, the petitioner appeared in the

second year main examination of the Course in question in April

2021 as well as in the Supplementary Examination thereof in

December 2022, but was declared failed in both the exams. The

petitioner was however, permitted to appear in the B.Sc. Nursing

Part-III Main Examination in April 2022 and was declared passed

in the said examination.

2.1. As the petitioner had failed to pass the B.Sc. Nursing Part-II

Examination, he appeared in B.Sc. Nursing Part-II

(Supplementary) re-exam on 10.06.2022; however, while the

examination of the Subject 'Communication and Educational

[2023/RJJD/015670] (3 of 7) [CW-4017/2023]

Technology' was going on, it was discovered that in place of the

petitioner, another candidate was impersonating him; whereupon,

an FIR (No.153/2022) was registered at Police Station, Shastri

Nagar, Jodhpur against the petitioner and the candidate, namely,

Phula Ram (impersonating the petitioner) for offences punishable

under Sections 419, 420, 120-B of IPC and under Sections 3 and 6

of the Rajasthan Public Examination (Use of Unfair Means) Act,

1992. In consequence of the said FIR, the petitioner was arrested,

but subsequently released on bail. After investigation, a charge-

sheet was submitted against the petitioner by the concerned

police authorities before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate No. 7

Jodhpur Metro, Jodhpur.

2.2 The case of the petitioner was forwarded to the University

and thereupon, referred to the Unfair Means Enquiry Committee.

Thereafter, the petitioner was informed vide letter 01.08.2022 that

he stood disqualified for a period of three years from appearing in

the examination, including the cancellation of the examination in

question; it was also stated in the said letter that the petitioner

had remained for his personal hearing on 26.07.2022.

2.3 On 04.03.2023, the respondent-University declared the

schedule for submission of online application form for B.Sc.

Nursing Part-I, II, III, IV and Post Basic B.Sc. Nursing Previous

and Final (Main) Examination April-2023. The petitioner though

wished to fill the Examination form for B.Sc. Nursing Part-II for

the papers, in which he failed, but the University in view of the

letter 01.08.2022 disqualified him for the said purpose. Thus,

[2023/RJJD/015670] (4 of 7) [CW-4017/2023]

aggrieved by the aforesaid letter, the petitioner has preferred the

present petition claiming the afore-quoted reliefs.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

procedure for dealing with the cases involving Unfair means and

Disorderly Conduct is provided under Ordinance 152-4 of the

University, as per the procedure laid down therein, in case a

candidate desires to be given personal hearing and/or if the

Standing Committee thinks it necessary, it shall fix a date and

time, and notify the concerned candidate by registered post, to

appear before the Committee for personal hearing. However, no

such notice was sent to the petitioner with regard to personal

hearing in relation to the alleged Unfair Means; instead the

impugned letter showcased the petitioner as absent on the date of

personal hearing. It was thus submitted that the impugned action

of the respondents is a clear violation of the procedure laid down

in the Ordinance of the University, for dealing with cases of Unfair

Means.

3.1. It was further submitted that as the petitioner had failed in

B.Sc. Part-II Examination, he wished to fill the online form for the

examination, however in view of the impugned letter, the

petitioner had been disqualified and could no longer submit the

Examination Form.

3.2. In furtherance, it was submitted that the petitioner's case

was not dealt according to Ordinance 152-4 as in the present

matter the Unfair Means Enquiry Committee did not place any

recommendation for consideration and approval before the

Syndicate before imposing the impugned punishment upon the

[2023/RJJD/015670] (5 of 7) [CW-4017/2023]

petitioner, and thus, the same was in violation of the procedure so

provided for dealing with matter relating to Unfair means.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents,

while opposing the aforesaid submissions made on behalf of the

petitioner, submitted that for expeditious disposal of the matter, it

was placed before the Unfair Means Case Enquiry Committee and

a meeting was held on 26.07.2022, wherein the petitioner was

supposed to make his appearance for personal hearing, and that,

intimation of the same was sent by a registered post (letter dated

22.07.2022) to the petitioner making it clear that on failure on

part of the petitioner to appear on the given date, the decision of

the committee would be binding upon him. However, the petitioner

still failed to make an appearance, despite service of the said

letter.

4.1. It was further submitted that in the meeting held on

26.07.2022, a decision was taken that the petitioner deserves to

be punished as per Ordinance 152-4(j)(iv), which reads as under.

"O.152-4(j) If a candidate is found guilty of :

(i) to (iii) . . . ...

(iv) Impersonating a candidate or being impersonated by any person, he shall be disqualified from appearing/passing in any University examination for a period of two to three years including the present examination."

4.2 In furtherance, it was submitted that a meeting of Board of

Management was held on 07.01.2023 and as per agenda no.5 of

the said meeting, the decision taken on 26.07.2022 by the Unfair

Means Case Enquiry Committee was approved.

[2023/RJJD/015670] (6 of 7) [CW-4017/2023]

4.3. Learned counsel further submitted that the offence of

impersonation by a fake candidate in the examination is a heinous

one, despite this, an opportunity of personal hearing was given to

the petitioner, but the petitioner, by remaining absent, failed to

avail such a reasonable and adequate opportunity.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties as well as perused

the record of the case.

6. This Court observes that the petitioner is a student pursuing

B.Sc. Nursing Course at respondent no.1-College. The present

issue relates to the B.Sc. Nursing Part-II (Supplementary) re-

exam held on 10.06.2022 wherein one Phula Ram was found

giving the paper of 'Communication and Educational Technology'

in place of the petitioner, thereby the petitioner was being

impersonated by the said Phula Ram.

7. This Court further observes that both the petitioner and

Phula Ram were charged with the offence punishable under the

aforementioned provisions of law. In furtherance, after completion

of the investigation, chargesheet was filed before the learned

competent Court.

7.1. However, vide the impugned letter dated 01.08.2022, the

respondent-University disqualified the petitioner for three years

and also cancelled the examination given on 10.06.2022.

8. This Court also observes that the petitioner's case is not that

of a simple cheating taking place during the exam, instead it is a

grave matter of impersonation (Phula Ram was giving the paper in

place of the petitioner). Such incidents defeat the entire purpose

of conducting the exams. An exam is conducted so as to evaluate

[2023/RJJD/015670] (7 of 7) [CW-4017/2023]

as to what the concerned student has learned during a particular

course of time and how well he is able to retain and apply the

same in the examination.

9. This Court further observes that the conduct of cheating by

impersonation is a matter of grave concern, as it is not only

detrimental to the student himself/herself, who is trying to derive

benefit therefrom, but also reflects poorly on those students, who

have actually worked hard for the exams, meaning thereby, such

conduct of cheating by impersonation put the other students in a

disadvantageous position.

10. This Court further observes that in the present matter, even

intimation of personal hearing was given, yet the petitioner

remained absent. Thus, a lenient view of the conduct of the

petitioner cannot be taken in the present matter, and hence, in the

given factual matrix, this Court does not find any legal infirmity in

the impugned action taken against the present petitioner.

11. Thus, in light of the aforesaid observations and looking into

the factual matrix of the case, this Court does not find it a fit case

so to grant any relief to the petitioner in the present petition.

12. Consequently the present petition is dismissed. All pending

applications stand disposed of.

(DR. PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J SKant/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)