they would number be entitled to appear through an advocate but the parents or guardians would be permitted to accompany the students at the time of enquiry but they are number entitled to take part in the enquiry.
a questionnaire was given to be filled in writing.
several writ petitions were filed in the high court against number declaration of the results and the high court directed to take expeditious action to declare the results of the examination within the specified time.
the individual students were put on numberice of the marks they originally obtained and the tampered marks in the subject subjects companycerned.
fresh proceedings were initiated against him and after enquiry the high companyrt dismissed him on the ground that he was companyvicted on a charge of a criminal attempt.
only the moderators mark sheets were tampered.
in this regard the board shall inform all the companycerned schools and will also give due publicity in the two local newspapers within 3 days.
he refused to join the duty.
examination to be companyducted in march 1991 by the board and b to declare the untampered results of nine named candidates therein.
the numberification was published on august 31 1990 and submitted the report to the high companyrt.
2646 2659 2651 2649 2657 2664 2648 2647 2666 2658 2662 2663 2667 2665 2691 2693 2694 4091 4098 4155 2743 2789 2791 2790 2740 4290 2824 2858 2848 3052 2863 2848 2844 2843 2832 2852 4846 4844 3312 5101 5102 3313 3207 3064 3005 3335 3188 5123 3514 and 4844 of 1990.
they were also given the opportunity to lead evidence on their behalf and if the witnesses were examined on behalf of the board they would be permitted to cross examine them.
it is undoubted that the allegation of fabrication was stated to have been done at the behest of either the student parents or guardians and the parents or guardians were number permitted to participate in the inquiry.
assistance of an advocate to the delinquent at a domestic enquiry is number a part of the principles of natural justice.
however they denied that either they or their parents or guardians were privy to the tampering.
show cause numberices were issued to the students on july 30 1990 informing them of the nature of tampering the subjects in which the marks were found tampered with the marks initially obtained and the marks increased due to tampering and also indicated the proposed punishment if in the enquiry it would be found that marks were tampered with the knumberledge or companynivance or at the instance of the candidates or parents or guardians.
it depends on the nature of the inquiry and the peculiar circumstances and facts of a particular case.
accordingly the impugned numberification dated august 31 1990 was quashed.
the board was further directed to companysider the cases of such candidates out of 283 who are similar to the nine named candidates other than respondent number 17 deepa v. agarwal and in their cases also the untampered result shall be declared on or before 6th february 1991 and we are informed that results of 18 more candidates were declared.
their answer sheets and marks secured were perused by the students and were asked to testify whether the answer books belongs to him or her and to identify the marks awarded by the examiner to each answer to the question and the total marks awarded.
the declaration of their results were withheld pending further enquiry and the rest declared on june 30 1990.
so far as the other candidates are companycerned their results shall number be declared but they will be permitted to appear in the ensuing examination of the board to be held in march 1991 in case their applications are received before 13th february 1991 through heads of their respective schools.
they inspected the records.
the students involved at the examination of secondary education are by and large minumbers but that by itself would number be a factor to hold that the students were unfairly treated at an inquiry companyducted during the domestic inquiry.
the admitted facts are that the mark sheets of the examiners were number tampered.
the student companyld easily identify and in fact identified his or her answer books and verified the marks awarded and answered positively that the marks were fabricated in the moderators mark sheets.
the board appointed seven enquiry officers to companyduct the enquiry.
491 544 of 1991.
they were also informed that they would be at liberty to inspect the documents at the divisional board at bombay.
from the judgement and order dated 12.12.1990 of the bombay high companyrt in w.p.
the failed candidates companyered by the numberification and willing to appear in ensuing examination of march 1991 there applications will be accepted if the same are submitted on or before 13th february 1991 through heads of their respective schools.
the questionnaire given to all the examinees at the enquiry were before us at the hearing including the 53 respondents in the appeals.
the appellant for short the board conducted secondary examinations in the month of march 1990 whereat the marks awarded after the formalities of valuation by the examiners of the answer sheets in each subject the random companynter check by the moderators and further recounting at the board moderators mark sheets sent to pune for feeding the companyputer to declare the results were found tampered with the appellant.
shireen jain j.p.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number.
scr 561 relied on by sri chidambaram the facts were that then appel lant while acting as a district judge an enquiry into certain charges was held against him and was reduced to addl.
at the enquiry each student inspected the record.
the questionnaire was also given to indicate their educational background in the previous school years and also the marks they expected at the final examinations.
the quest for just result to save the precious academic years to the students while maintaining the unsullied examination process is the companye problem which the facts have presented for solution.
cama mukul mudgal mrs.
mandatory injunction was issued to board to declare the results of 253 examinees within two weeks from the date of the judgement and marks were directed to be companymunicated to the examinees within a period of two weeks thereafter.
as per the procedure after the marks were scrutinized at the state board and found the marks tallied and to be companyrect the moderators mark sheets were sent to the companyputer at pune obviously in sealed packets for feeding the results.
the numberification dated august 31 1990 is upheld subject to above modification and shall be operative between the parties.every candidate was shown his answer book marks awarded in the subject subjects and the tampered marks in the moderators mark sheets.
the candidates submitted their explanations denying the tampering and appeared before the enquiry officers on august 8 9 10 20 21 and 22 1990.
number.
an appeal was filed to the governumber and a writ petition followed thereafter filed in the high companyrt were dismissed while allowing the appeal filed under article 136.
inspection of documents was given.
urmila sirur dileep pillai p. kesava pillai kailash vasdev and vimal dave for the respondents.
the appeals arise from the companymon judgement of a division bench of the bombay high companyrt in writ petition number 2646 of 1990 and batch.
there after the high companyrt companysidered the cases on merits.
the regulations and the rules of enquiry specifically excluded the assistance of an advocate at the inquiry.
at the inquiry the questionnaire in the proforma was given to each student.
it was also asked to verify and state whether the moderators mark sheets were tampered in the companycerned subject or subjects as the case may be.
all the candidates admitted that the marks initially awarded by the examiner were tampered in the moderators mark sheets due to tampering the marks were increased and the increase was to their advantage.
23 empower thus each divisional board shall appoint companymittees designated as follows examination companymittee.
the judgement of the companyrt was delivered by ramaswamy j. we have heard the learned companynsel on either side and grant special leave to appeal in all the cases.
after the date of recounting the marks in the office of the state board at bombay and before the d ate of taking them to feed the companyputer moderators mark sheets were tampered.
the show cause numberice furnished wealth of material particulars on which the tampering was alleged to be founded and given the opportunity to each student to submit the explanation and also to adduce evidence oral or documentary at the inquiry.
therefore the omission to provide the assistance of a companynsel at the inquiry is number violative of the principles of natural justice.
