1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR. Writ Petition No. 526 of 2007 (G.D. Badgayya Vs. Rashtra Sant Tukdoji Maharaj Nagpur University Nagpur & ors.) Appeal District : Application No. of 200 Writ petition - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's Orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr. Agnihotri h/f Mr. Anand Parchure, Adv. For the petitioner. Mr. B.G. Kulkarni, Adv. For R-1 to 3. CORAM : Smt. Vasanti A. Naik, J. DATE : 1 st October, 2008 Heard the learned counsel for the parties. By this petition, the petitioner impugns the communication dated 14/2/2006 issued by the respondent no.1- University as also the report dated 14/11/2005 submitted by the respondent no.2- The Disciplinary Action Committee, and further seeks exoneration of the petitioner of the charges levelled against him. The only submission made on behalf of the petitioner is that the question paper of Ku. Reena Jacob was not illegally kept back by 2 the petitioner, but was, by mistake, kept back and not sent to University by Pramod Munjewar who was appointed as Packer at the Examination Centre for the examinations held in Summer 2003. The petitioner was appointed as an Officer-in-charge at the Centre during the Sumer 2003 examinations. One Ku. Reena Jacob, Roll No. 164394, appeared for English Paper-I at M.A. Part II Examination on 17/4/2003, along with other examinees. Two Roll Numbers, Roll No. 164394 and 164420, were reported by the petitioner to the University under the unfair means. In stead of sending two answer books of the examinees having the aforesaid Roll Numbers, to the Assistant Registrar (Revaluation) along with the copying material, etc., the petitioner sent only one answer book of the examinee having Roll No. 164420 for further action at the University level and the answer book of Ku. Reena Jacob having Roll No. 164394 was not sent to the Assistant Registrar. The result of both the examinees were withheld by the University pending investigation by the 3 Committee. The case of Ku. Reena Jacob could not be placed before the Committee for investigation due to non-receipt of her answer book. The Committee had earlier submitted a report on 15th March, 2004, after issuing notice to Ku. Reena Jacob and the Officer-in-charge, i.e. the petitioner. The petitioner had filed Writ Petition No. 3765/2005 against the decision of Board of Examinations. The Division Bench of this Court asked the University to reconsider the issue raised by the petitioner afresh by giving him a reasonable opportunity of hearing. After the orders were passed by the Division Bench of this Court in the writ petition filed by the petitioner, a detailed show cause notice was issued to the petitioner mentioning the charges levelled against him and he was asked to appear before the Disciplinary Action Committee on 25/10/2005 along with the record. The petitioner was duly heard by the Committee and the contentions of the petitioner were reduced in writing. It was informed by the Assistant Registrar (Revaluation) to the Committee that he did not 4 receive the necessary information from the petitioner in Form No. 5 and the examination paper of Ku. Reena Jacob was also not sent to the Assistant Registrar though a case of unfair means was reported. It was also noticed during the enquiry that while the petitioner was working as an Officer-in-charge at the Centre of Examination on 24/5/2003, he had reported 31 cases of unfair means, but at that relevant time also, the petitioner had only forwarded the necessary data and the examination papers of 24 candidates and the details about the other 7 cases were not reported by the petitioner to the Assistant Registrar. It was also noticed by the Committee that the petitioner was the in- charge for conducting the Summer 2000 examinations at Rani Agnihotri College of Physical Education, Wardha and at that relevant time also, he had committed several lapses and an enquiry was conducted against the petitioner at that relevant time. The Board of Examinations warned the petitioner for the lapses committed by him during the Summer 2000 examinations. The Committee, therefore, 5 observed that the petitioner did not change his attitude in spite of the issuance of warning for the lapses committed by him during the Summer 2000 Examinations. It was also noticed by the Committee that though the petitioner was asked by the communication dated 17/4/03 to submit the answer book of Ku. Reena Jacob as early as possible, the answer book was retained by the petitioner till 10/12/2003 and were submitted to the Assistant Registrar on that date. This, according to the Committee, clearly showed that the petitioner was not performing his duty according to the directions issued by the University and hence the petitioner was debarred permanently from doing any University Examination work. In pursuance of the report of the Committee dated 14th November, 2005, the University issued a letter to the Management of Rani Agnihotri College of Physical Education, Wardha, to take necessary action against the petitioner for his misconduct in the Summer 2003 Examination. No fault could be found with the report of the Committee dated 14th November, 6 2005 and the consequent communication dated 14/2/2006 issued by the University to the Management. The petitioner is not entitled to any relief in exercise of the jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The petition is, therefore, dismissed with no order as to costs. JUDGE RMP