IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. L.P.A. No.701 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: 7.8.2009 Dr. Neha Sharma & others. -----Appellants Vs. State of Haryana & others. -----Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY Present:- Mr. Deepak Agnihotri, Advocate for the appellants. ----- ORDER: 1. This appeal has been preferred against judgment of the learned Single Judge, dismissing the writ petition. 2. The direction sought in the writ petition was to cancel the result of examination for selecting Demonstrators in the Medical College. 3. Case of the appellants is that on 13.6.2008, advertisement was given for filling up 27 posts of Demonstrators. 520 persons applied for the said posts. The Screening Test was to be held on 15.3.2009 but the same was deferred and was held on 19.7.2009. 174 candidates appeared in the said test. Result was declared on 20.7.2009. The said result was liable to be LPA No.701 of 2009 quashed on the ground that no identification of the candidates was affixed on the roll number slips, which could result in impersonation. There were four examination centres, quite away from each other and time gap in distributing the papers could result in leakage. Mass copying took place. The paper was objective type and mobile phones could be used. There was no checking of mobile phones and calculators at the entrance where the examination held. 4. The learned Single Judge held that the question raised in the petition was disputed question of fact and in absence of any clinching material, it was not open for the Court to go into the matter. 5. We have heard learned counsel for the appellants. 6. Learned counsel for the appellants relies upon judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Madhyamik Shiksha Mandal, M.P. v. Abhilash Shiksha Prasar Samiti 1998(9) SCC 236, where on account of leakage of question paper and copying, as reported in the report of the Naib Tehsildar and the valuers, the decision was taken by the School Education Board to cancel the result. The said decision was interfered with by the High Court. The Hon’ble Supreme Court held that there being sufficient material in support of the decision of the School Education Board, there was no ground for the High Court to cancel the decision taken. 2 LPA No.701 of 2009 7. We do not find any relevance of the judgment relied upon. In the present case, there is neither any decision taken by any authority nor any report made by any official agency. Holding of examination has to be left to the concerned authorities. In absence of any clinching material, a direction to cancel result cannot be given. At best, the appellants can approach the concerned authorities. 8. In this view of the matter, we do not find any ground to interfere with the view taken by the learned Single Judge. 9. The appeal is dismissed. (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) JUDGE August 07, 2009 ( DAYA CHAUDHARY ) ashwani JUDGE 3