TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1969 (1) TMI 85
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ny examination prior to the second examination of 1969, on the ground of alleged malpractice in that on March 23, 1968, in the morning session when the examination in Physics was in progress, he was found in possession of a piece of manuscript paper which the petitioner is alleged to have utilised at the time of the examination. 2. On May 20, 1968, the University issued on the petitioner a notice for the alleged malpractice, requiring him to show cause why disciplinary action should not be taken against the petitioner on the following charges: (i) he was in possession of unauthorised material in the examination hall in contravention of the Rules prescribed by the University for the guidance of candidates printed on the Admit Car....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... petitioner changed to another tutor for private tuition, that the Invigilator might have borne some grudge against the petitioner and was perhaps seeking an opportunity to damage his career, which he had done bv picking up some sheet in the Examination Hall and alleging it to have been in the petitioner's possession and to have been copied out by the petitioner in answering questions. The petitioner made a prayer that he wanted to cross-examine the Invigilator on the date of the Enquiry and that the Invigilator may be summoned to appear before the Malpractices Enquiry Committee and that the petitioner may be allowed to cross-examine him. 7. The main points urged on behalf of the petitioner are that the proceedings of the Enquiry Com....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... held that no case had been made out by Bakshi that the rules of natural justice require that he should have the right to cross-examine all the persons who had sworn affidavits supporting the allegations made against him. 9. In support of his claim of right to cross-examine the Invigilator, the petitioner relied on an English decision. University of Ceylon v. Fernando, (1960) 1 All ER 631. That case dealt with the report of a Commission of Enquiry set up by the Vice-Chancellor of Ceylon University against the alleged malpractices of a student as in the present case and no special form of procedure was prescribed. In course of the enquiry viva voce evidence was taken as quoted in extenso in the judgment. There the question arose whether t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nquiry from all sources and through all channels, without being fettered by rules of procedure which govern proceedings in courts. The only obligation which the law casts on them is that they are not to act on any information which they may receive unless they put it to the party against whom it is used and give a fair opportunity of explaining it. What is a fair opportunity must depend on the facts and circumstances of each case and where such opportunity had been given, the proceedings are not open to attack on the ground that the enquiry was not conducted in accordance with the procedure followed in Courts: State of Mysore v. Shiva Basappa. 11. In the present case, after the show cause notice was served, the particulars of the charges....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h the University came to the impugned decision, was this: "Looking at the slip of paper he (petitioner) said that that was in the handwriting of the Invigilator. The Invigilator's report in his own handwriting was shown to him. The two are so widely different that there cannot be any remote possibility of semblance. The candidate said he knew nothing about this in the Examination Hall. But the Superintendent has reported that he personally went to the Examination Hail and the candidate admitted the fact to him. The Conducting Board reported specific portions from the incriminating material copied in the Answer Book. The evidence is definite that the candidate copied certain answers from the incriminating material in hi....