IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WA.No. 1885 of 2010()
1. K.P.SUBAIR,
... Petitioner
2. SADIQ K.A., S/O.ABUBACKER K.K.,
3. HUSSAIN K.K.,
Vs
1. COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND
... Respondent
2. THE PRO-VICE CHANCELLOR,
3. THE VICE CHANCELLOR,
For Petitioner :SRI.M.V.THAMBAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.Q.BARKATH ALI
Dated :04/11/2010
O R D E R
A.K. Basheer & P.Q. Barkath Ali, JJ.
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
WA. No. 1885 of 2010
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Dated this the 4th day of November, 2010
Judgment
Basheer, J:
Appellants who participated in the written test held
by the Cochin University of Science and Technology on
August 14, 2010 for selection to the post of Sweeper-Cum-
Cleaner pursuant to Ext.P1 notification, have filed the writ
petition alleging that the question paper of the said written
test had leaked even before the test had commenced.
Appellants pressed into service Ext.P4 which is stated to be
a portion of the question paper, and contended that the
entire process of selection had been vitiated because of the
above malpractice. Therefore they prayed before the
learned single Judge that the written test be declared as
null and void. The above contention was repelled by the
learned single Judge and the writ petition was dismissed.
Hence this appeal.
2. It may at once be noticed that appellants
primarily banked on Ext.P4, to which we have already
referred to, in support of their contention that the question
paper had leaked even before the commencement of the
test. The other material on which the appellants placed
reliance was on the “flash news” that was reportedly
beamed by several channels on electronic media at the time
WA.1885/2010. : 2 :
when the test was being held indicating that the question
paper for the test had already leaked out. Appellants also
placed reliance on certain newspaper clippings which, of
course, appeared on the next day after the examination was
held.
3. As regards Ext.P4 it may be noticed that it is
admittedly an excerpt from a text book. The candidates
were asked to read the passage and answer question Nos.
21 to 30 in the question booklet. A perusal of the question-
answer booklet which was produced by the University
before us would reveal that the candidates were supposed
to answer 100 questions. Even assuming that Ext.P4, which
is a truncated portion of the question paper, had leaked
out, no significance or importance can be attached to the
said piece of paper if we may term it as such. As rightly
noticed by the learned single Judge, the print, font etc. of
Ext.P4 did not have any similarity or resemblance to the
question paper which was produced before the learned
single Judge.
4. We have also perused the question paper
booklet which is made available for our perusal. If in fact
the question paper had leaked as alleged by the appellants, it
would have been available with somebody. Anyhow
appellants have not produced the leaked question paper
WA.1885/2010. : 3 :
before us. The only material that they have produced is an
excerpt from a text book which incidentally happens to be a
passage quoted in the question paper booklet, from which
the candidates were supposed to answer 10 questions.
Nothing more nothing less.
5. Having carefully perused the entire materials
available on record, we do not find any substance in the
allegations made by the appellant. We do not deem it
necessary to refer to the other facile allegations and
accusations made by the appellants in the writ petition
which, in our view, do not even warrant any reference,
leave alone any discussion or consideration. The writ
petition is totally devoid any merit and it is liable to be
dismissed with cost. We do so.
Appellant shall pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- as cost to
the University within one month from to day.
A.K. Basheer
Judge.
P.Q. Barkath Ali
Judge.
an.