IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9774 of 2010 1. SHUSHMA KUMARI, D/O SHRI SHYAM SUNDER SINGH, 2ND PART LAW STUDENT IN S.K.J, LAW COLLEGE BOARDED AT HOSTEL NO. 1, (P.G. GIRLS HOSTAL), ROOM NO.5, AT MUZAFFARPUR AT PRESENT - QUARTER NO. C- 45, NEW SWARN REKHA COLONY, ADITYAPUR AT JAMSHEDPUR. Versus 1. THE VICE CHANCELLOR, B. R. AMBEDKAR BIHAR UNIVERSITY,MUZAFFARPUR. 2. THE REGISTRAR, B. R. AMBEDKAR BIHAR UNIVERSITY,MUZAFFARPUR. 3. CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATION, B. R. AMBEDKAR BIHAR UNIVERSITY,MUZAFFARPUR. 4. CENTRE SUPERINTENDENT CUM PRINCIPAL,M.P. SINHA SCIENCE COLLEGE AT MUZAFFARPUR. ----------- 4/ 05/10/2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the University. The petitioner was a candidate at the L.L.B. Part-2 examination in the session-2009-10 when he was ousted from the examination on allegations of use of unfair means. She came to this Court in C.W.J.C. No.2975/10. This Court directed the Controller of Examination to grant her a hearing. This Court does not consider it necessary to enter into the dispute whether the petitioner did not appear before the University Authorities on the date fixed or her contention that on account of a ‘Bandh’ call given by a political party and later because of a crime committed in the University precincts. If the petitioner was to be visited with adverse consequences on allegations of having used unfair means, she was required to be made known the basis on - 2 - which the allegations were being made. A basic prerequisite therefore was the issuance of a show cause notice with specified grounds enabling her to understand and appreciate the nature of the allegations against her and to meet the same. In absence of such a show cause notice, the petitioner did not have the advantage of knowing why she was being alleged to have used unfair means. The contention of the University that since she herself was using unfair means she was well aware of the grounds, is not acceptable as it amounts to prejudging the issue and condemning the petitioner unheard. Learned counsel for the University very fairly acknowledges that in pursuance of the order of this Court in C.W.J.C. No.2975/10 it only issued notice for a hearing to the petitioner. The notice did not mention the grounds on which allegations for use of unfair means were being made against the petitioner. The requirement of giving a reasoned and speaking show cause notice in the aforesaid terms was implicit in the order dated 28.4.2010. This Court only hopes and expects that the University will put its own house in order and will not multiply litigations by not complying with the essential requirements of the law which any institution occupied by educated persons is expected to be well aware of, - 3 - especially when they pertain to rudimentary principles of law. Let the petitioner appear with a copy of the present order before the Vice Chancellor of the University. The Vice Chancellor shall simultaneously intimate to the petitioner the date and time on which she will appear before him when the Vice Chancellor shall hand over a copy of the show cause notice to the petitioner. The notice must contain the reasons, materials and grounds why she is alleged to have used unfair means along with supporting documents, if any, on which the show cause may rely. The show cause notice must specify the time period within which the petitioner must file her reply and before which authority and in what manner. The show cause notice must also disclose the date of hearing fixed in the matter after the petitioner files her reply. This Court directs the Vice Chancellor to complete the enquiry proceedings in the aforesaid manner within a maximum period of four weeks from the date of receipt/presentation of a copy of this order before him, provided the petitioner herself cooperates. The writ application stands disposed. KC ( Navin Sinha, J.)