IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.23561 of 2011 Date of Decision : December 19, 2011. Rohit Raghav .....Petitioner versus Panjab University, Chandigarh and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.Vipin Mahajan, Advocate, for the petitioner. -.- 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? --- Surya Kant, J. (Oral) The petitioner was caught by the Invigilator Sukhpal Singh Rana while indulging in unfair means in B.A. Punjabi (Elective) examination. The petitioner exhibited total indiscipline and what to show any respect for a teacher, gave thrashings to the said Invigilator which lead to registration of an FIR against the petitioner under Sections 323,341, 506 IPC. Based upon a fact finding enquiry, the Unfair Means Standing Committee of the University recommended the expulsion and disqualification of the petitioner from appearing in any examination of the University for a period of five years and the Vice-Chancellor of the University approved the said recommendation of the Committee vide order dated 2.6.2010 (AnnexureP-3). Against the order dated 2.6.2010, the petitioner approached this Court in CWP No.18778 of 2010 which was allowed on the plea for violation of the principles of natural justice and the CWP No.23561 of 2011 [2] respondents were accordingly directed to grant opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Pursuant thereto, the Panjab University, Chandigarh has passed a self-speaking order dated 30.8.2011 (Annexure P-10) which is under challenge, reiterating its previous decision. Meanwhile, the petitioner is said to have been acquitted in the criminal case as the complainant- teacher did not support the prosecution version. It is further alleged that the report of the Fact Finding Committee, relied upon by the Unfair Means Committee was not supplied to him. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, I do not find any ground to interfere with the impugned order. This Court can take judicial notice of the increasing grave indiscipline and violent activities in the academic campuses. The petitioner having been caught while copying, crossed all the norms and he attacked the college teacher. The acquittal in the criminal case merely because the complainant-teacher did not support the prosecution case, per-se does not absolve the petitioner of his serious misconduct. It is not the case of the petitioner that any member of the Unfair Means Committee was biased towards him or that he has not been reasonably heard. The fact finding enquiry report in such like cases, calls for no interference by a writ Court. The University has done a commendable job while passing the impugned order. A Court of equity should not otherwise come to the rescue of such like students. Dismissed. December 19, 2011 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE