LPA No.1221 of 2011 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. LPA No. 1221 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision 4.11.2011 Kamal Singh . Appellant Versus Maharishi Dayanand University and others .. Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV NARAIN RAINA Present: Mr. P.P.Singh, Advocate with Mr. Vivek Khatri, Advocate for the appellant 1. To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 2. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest ? M.M.KUMAR, Acg.CJ. 1. The instant appeal filed under clause X of the Letters Patent is directed against judgement dated 7.3.2011 rendered by the learned Single Judge holding that the appellant- petitioner had indulged in unfair means in the examination by committing fraud. He concocted the story of suffering from an injury in an accident and pretended that his right hand was incapable of functioning. It was with the object of procuring the help of a scribe for answering the questions with his assistance. On 5.4.2008 he took the help of the scribe and did not use the scribe in the examination held on 10.4.2008 and onwards. The University- respondent found as a fact that he was never injured and he forged the signatures of the head of the department on the photograph which was appearing on the authority letter of the scribe given to him. The University- respondent successfully showed that the appellant petitioner had admitted his lapse and pleaded for forgiveness. Accordingly the University proceeded against him in accordance with LPA No.1221 of 2011 (O&M) 2 clause 4(k) and (m) by inflicting the punishment contemplated under clause 8(i) and (ii) of the University Calendar. Accordingly the punishment of debarring him from appearing in the University examination for a period of three years was inflicted. The learned Single Judge summed up the findings as under: “ Prima facie, it appears that the petitioner has used an ingenuine method to adopt unfair means in examination. He cooked up a story about meeting with an accident and suffering a fracture on the right hand. It is not conceivable that a person who suffered a fracture, would just seven days after be fit enough to take the examination by appearing without a plaster and without a scribe. Besides, the petitioner apparently has admitted to his guilt which is evident from Annexure P-5 (R- 1/1). The petitioner, however, denies the existence of this document. The Court under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India has no means to determine as to whether such a document, which has been placed on record, is reflection of its genuineness or not. In the absence of this the Court is now left to examine as to whether the punishment awarded to the petitioner is excessive or was it in accordance with the provisions of the ordinance of the University or not. The charge against the petitioner is that he had made deliberate attempt to cheat in the examination, which is evident, as he had used the help of a scribe without there being any injury on his person. The signatures of the Chairman of the Law Department were also forged.” LPA No.1221 of 2011 (O&M) 3 2. The appellant -petitioner was permitted to appear in the examination which was to be conducted in April, 2011 as the period of three years had expired. 3. Having heard the learned counsel, we are of the considered view that no case is made out for interference of this Court as the instant appeal is wholly ill advised. The appellant- petitioner had already been dealt with leniently and any further relief could not be given to him. Dismissed. (M.M.Kumar) Acting Chief Justice (Rajiv Narain Raina) 4.11.2011 Judge okg