Civil Writ Petition No. 3112 of 2007 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh. Civil Writ Petition No. 3112 of 2007 Date of Decision: 29.4.2008 Kawaljit Kaur …Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and Others …Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. Veneet Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Yatinder Sharma, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, for respondents No.1 and 2. Mr. V.K.Shukla, Advocate for respondent No.3. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. This petition has been filed by Kawaljit Kaur, daughter of Pargat Singh praying for issuance of Writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the order dated 29.11.2006 (Annexure P4) and order dated 8.2.2007 (Annexure P7), vide which petitioner has been held ineligible for appearing in the examination for three consecutive years under Punjab School Education Board (Penalties for Misconduct and Use of Unfair Means in the Examinations) Regulations, 1979 (for short “the Regulations”), Rule 17(III), from Matriculation Examination March 2005 Civil Writ Petition No. 3112 of 2007 2 and also recommended the cancellation of her result of Matriculation Examination March 2005. Vide order dated 8.2.2007 (Annexure P7) appeal preferred by the petitioner was reconsidered by the Unfair Means Committee and the same was dismissed without there being any merit in the same. Respondent No.3 Punjab School Education Board has filed reply and has taken the following preliminary objection:- “1. That the present writ petition is not maintainable as the petitioner has not come to the Court with clean hands and has not stated the true facts of the case. In fact, the petitioner along with other candidates appeared in the Matriculation Examination held by Punjab School Education Board (hereinafter referred to as Board) in March 205 as a regular candidate. After the declaration of the result of the said examination, a candidate namely Miss Navjot Kaur d/o Sh. Satinderjit Singh, Roll No. 253454 applied for rechecking of her answer books pertaining to the papers o Punjabi-A, Punjabi-B and English. On rechecking, it came to the notice of the Board that so far the answer book of Punjabi-B paper of Miss Navjot Kaur is concerned, the cover page of the same was in the handwriting of said Miss Navjot Kaur, however, the internal pages of the said answer book of the petitioner. Upon this, Unfair Means committee (in short UMC) of the Board issued a show cause Civil Writ Petition No. 3112 of 2007 3 notice dated 28.6.2006, annexure P-3 to the petitioner for showing cause with regard to the replacement of the internal pages of her answer book of Punjabi B paper. Subsequently, the petitioner filed her reply and appeared before the UMC Committee and she was heart at length and after considering all the pleas raised by the petitioner and also on perusal of concerned record, it was found that the internal pages of the answer book of Navjot Kaur were placed in the answer book of the petitioner and the internal pages of the answer book of the petitioner were placed in the answer book of one Arvinder Kaur Roll No. 257566 and further the internal pages of Arvinder Kaur were placed in the answer book of Navjot Kaur. In view of above, the UMC Committee after affording the due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as to Miss Arvinder Kaur Roll No. 257566 came to the conclusion that exchange of the internal pages of the Punjabi-B paper of the aforementioned candidates took place in connivance of supervisory staff of the examination Center and accordingly found the petitioner as well as Arvinder kaur Roll No. 257566 guilty of the same. Accordingly, the UMC Committee recommended to cancel the result of Matriculation Examination 2005 of the petitioner and Civil Writ Petition No. 3112 of 2007 4 of Arvinder Kaur and to debar them for appearing in the examination for next three consecutive years as per Regulation 17(iii) of the Punjab School Education Board (Penalties for Misconduct and Use of Unfair Means in the Examination) Regulation 1979. Relevant extract of the Regulation 17(iii) is reproduced hereunder:- “17(iii):- replacing or getting replaced his answer book during or after the examination with or without the help or connivance of any person connected with the examination Center or of any agency within or outside the examination Center. His result for that examination shall be cancelled and he shall be disqualified from appearing in any examination of the Board for a period which may extend from three to five consecutive examinations”. We have also perused Inquiry Report dated 16.10.2006 (Annexure R1) passed by the Unfair Means Committee wherein it has recommended the cancellation of Examination Center by the Board forever. It will be appropriate here to reproduce Clause 3(e) of Penalties for Misconduct and use of Unfair Means in the Board's Examinations:- Civil Writ Petition No. 3112 of 2007 5 “PENALTIES FOR MISCONDUCT AND USE OF UNFAIR MEANS IN THE BOARD's EXAMINATIONS. 3(e) 'Examination' for the purpose of these regulations means annual as well as supplementary examination” Clause 17 is also reproduced below:- “17. If a candidate is found guilty of: i) smuggling an answer book, or ii) taking out or arranging to send out an answer book, or iii) replacing or getting replaced his answer book during or after the examination with or without the help or connivance of any person connected with the examination center or of any agency within or outside the examination Center. His result for that examination shall be cancelled and he shall be disqualified from appearing in any examination of the Board for a period which may extend from three to five consecutive examinations”. Civil Writ Petition No. 3112 of 2007 6 It has been urged before us by learned counsel for the petitioner that by disqualifying the petitioner in order dated 29.11.2006 (Annexure P4) for three consecutive years, grave error has been committed by the respondent Board. Petitioner could at most be disqualified for appearing in examination of the Board which may extend from three to five consecutive examinations and not for three consecutive years and the definition of examination include annual and supplementary examinations. On this count we have also heard learned counsel for the respondent Board. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, we deem it appropriate to modify the order dated 29.11.2006 (Annexure P4) to the limited extent that instead of three consecutive years same shall be read as three consecutive examinations. Hence, order dated 29.11.2006 (Anneuxre P4) shall read that Unfair Means Committee has declared the petitioner ineligible for appearing in the examinations for three consecutive examinations. With these modifications in order dated 29.11.2006 (Annexure P4), the present writ petition is disposed off. (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge (Ashutosh Mohunta) Judge April 29, 2008 “DK”