IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No. 11974 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: 09.11.2010 Harpal Singh ...Petitioner Versus C.B.S.E. and another ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH Present: Mr. H.N. Khanduja, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Harish Rathee, Sr. DAG, Haryana for the State. Mr. Harsh Aggarwal, Advocate for respondent No. 1. ***** RANJIT SINGH J. The petitioner appeared in the All India Senior School Certificate Examination in the year 2008 when he was declared pass in four subjects out of five. In July, 2008, he appeared in the compartment examination of Chemistry. In the meantime, he had also taken admission in B.A.-I in Government College, Rohtak. While appearing in the examination, the petitioner was found using unfair means. Ultimately, the petitioner was disqualified for one year and his current examination was also cancelled. He has, accordingly, filed this writ petition to challenge that order. In the reply filed, the right of the petitioner to seek intervention by the writ court is put to challenge. It is stated that while appearing in the examination, the petitioner was using incriminating material in the shape of handwritten notes and pages of certain Civil Writ Petition No. 11974 of 2009 (O&M) -2- books. As soon as the petitioner was caught, he ran from the centre without signing the documents. The case was, accordingly, referred to the Unfair Means Committee. The Board had also examined the answer sheets of the petitioner alongwith the incriminating material and it was found that the petitioner had used the said material while answering the question Nos. 2, 15 and 17. The petitioner was given an opportunity of hearing and thereafter the impugned order was passed. The counsel for the petitioner would first submit that all the candidates while appearing in the examination center were thoroughly searched and, thus, it cannot be assumed that the petitioner could carry any material in his possession. There is neither any rule or a material placed on record to show that the candidates before entering the examination centre were searched. This submission raised by the counsel for the petitioner is to say the least laughable. The counsel then contends that the petitioner was required to be supplied the second answer sheet, if he caught, while using unfair means and not doing so would show violation of the rules. As given in the written statement, the petitioner had bolted from the place as soon as he was caught and question of giving him second answer sheet would not arise. All such issues as being raised by the counsel are beyond the purview of writ court. No meaningful and legally acceptable submissions are made by the counsel. The petitioner was concededly found using unfair means for which he cannot be shown any leniency. Rather the petitioner was needed to be dealt with more severely and appears to have been let Civil Writ Petition No. 11974 of 2009 (O&M) -3- off lightly. The petitioner would not deserve any sympathy. The Board has rightly cancelled the whole examination and grievance in this regard is not justified. This is not a case where even any equity can be shown to the petitioner. The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed. November 09, 2010 ( RANJIT SINGH ) rts JUDGE