ORDER
Dipak Misra, J.
1. The factual matrix and the question of law involved being similar this batch of writ petitions was heard analogously and is disposed of by this common order. Ordinarily the facts of one of the case would have been adumbrated but to depict the clear picture a short narration of facts of each case is given below.
2. In Writ Petition No. 4820 of 1999 the petitioners as regular students of Narendra Singh Gaur Higher Secondary School Kormar appeared in Class XIIth examination for the year 1998-99 from the examination centre Government Higher Secondary School Chandera in the District of Tikamgarh. The Board of Secondary Education Madhya Pradesh declared the result of Class XIIth examination for the academic session 1998-99 in the month of June, 1999 and the petitioner received their respective mark-sheets on 9-8-1999 as a result of which they could not appear in the supplementary examination meant for class XIIth. After receipt of mark-sheet the petitioners sent their representations but their prayer had gone unheeded. According to the writ petitioners they have good academic career and they have done well in all the papers but in English subject they have been awarded zero marks. It is also averred that the examination at the centre was conducted in a fair manner and the petitioners were not involved in any kind of malpractice yet petitioners have been awarded zero marks for no justifiable reason. Allegations have been made that the answer books have not been properly valued. With the aforesaid averments prayer has been made to requisition the answer books of the petitioners and direct for fresh valuation.
3. A reply has been filed by the answering respondent No. 1/ Borad of Secondary Education contending, inter alia, that a complaint was made on 6-3-1999 by the Deputy Director of Education, Tikamgarh informing the Board that Deputy Collector, Tikamgarh had made a surprise inspection in examination centres No. 21032 and 21044 on 4-3-1999 and 5-3-1999 and on the basis of that inspection he had lodged a complaint that there was mass-copying at the centres. On the basis of the aforesaid complaint Board instructed Valuation Officer to value the answer papers on proper scrutiny. On a scrutiny of the answer papers it was found that the answer copies reflected mass copying. Thereafter, the matter was put up before the Result Committee for appropriate action. It is set forth in the return that the Result Committee after careful scrutiny of the documents on record and after scrutinising the answer papers arrived at the conclusion that there was mass copying and the result of the students involved in the mass copying should riot be declared. Further they came to hold that the students engaged in mass copying should be awarded zero marks in certain subjects. Out of 450 students 260 students were found to have been involved in mass copying for which they have been awarded zero marks in English.
4. It is also clarified in the return that the petitioners have not approached this Court with clean hands inasmuch as they have made allegations on the Board that due to its delayed publication of the result of the main examination they could not appear in the supplementary examination and as a result of that they have wasted their one year but as an actual fact the petitioners Nos. 1 and 3 appeared in the supplementary examination but did not meet with success. The other petitioners chose not to appear in the supplementary examination. With these averments the claim in the writ has been resisted.
5. In W.P. No. 3961/99 the petitioners appeared in the Class Xllth examination for the academic session 1998-99 from the Government Higher Secondary School Lidhora District Tikamgarh. It is averred in the writ petition that the petitioners are brilliant students and had secured high percentage of marks in their previous examinations. But they were surprised when they got their marksheet of the examination in question. They found the petitioners Nos. 1 to 4 have got zero marks in the papers of Hindi and Chemistry and petitioner No. 5 has been awarded zero marks in Chemistry only. The grievance of the petitioners is that though they are good students and performed well in the examination, they have been awarded zero marks which vitiates the entire examination.
A return has been filed by the respondents Nos. 1 and 2 contending, inter alia, that after the answer papers were completed they were sent by the Central Superintendent of the Centre to the valuation cell for valuation by the centre. During valuation of the Hindi and Chemistry papers by the valuer it was found that there was suspicious uniformity in certain answer papers of some students. On the basis of this a report was prepared in the presence of the Deputy Head Valuer and Head Valuer who countersigned the report. The aforesaid report was sent to the Board for necessary action. It is also the stand in the return that Flying Squad after inspection made a complaint to the Collector, Tikamgarh that in certain centres number of unwarranted elements were entering into the premises and those In-charge of the examination were feeling insecure. Lot of material used for copying was also seized. Similar complaint was sent by the Deputy Director of Education to the S. P. Tikamgarh. Taking alt these aspects into consideration and appreciating the obtaining factual matrix and on scrutiny of the answer papers by the Result Committee it was thought apposite to award zero marks to the students who have been engaged in mass copying. Out of 286 students in the paper of Hindi 18 were penalised and in respect of Chemistry out of 284 students suspected 46 students were found involved in the mass copying.
6. In W.P. No. 4226/99 the petitioner appeared in the Class XIIth examination in the academic session of 1998-99 as a regular student. The grievance of the petitioner is that though he had done well in the examination, he had been awarded zero marks in the subject of Chemistry Theory. As regards supplementary examination it is stated that due to delayed publication he could not fill up his forms.
A return has been filed by the respondent/Board contending, inter alia, that Deputy Director of Education, Additional Collector and Sub Divisional Officer had made surprised Inspection in which the petitioner was found to be involved in mass copying as a result of which he has been awarded zero marks, As regards supplementary examination it is averred in the return that by telegraphic message the petitioner was informed about the permission for appearing in the examination and the same was communicated to the Superintendent of concerned Centre. The students who were informed to appear in the supplementary examination had appeared except the present petitioner for the reason unknown.
7. In W.P. No. 3818/99 the petitioners appeared in the Class XIIth examination from the Centre Narendra Singh Gour Higher Secondary School Karmor, Tahsil Jatra for the academic session 1998-99. Their grievance is that though they have done very well in the examination, they have been awarded zero marks in the subject of English.
A return has been filed by the respondent/Board alleging that there was report of mass copying and on proper scrutiny and examination it was concluded that there was mass copying, and accordingly, zero marks was awarded to the present petitioner. As far as appearance in supplementary examination is concerned it is stated that the petitioners did appear in the same but except petitioners Nos. 3 and 5 others could not succeed.
8. In W.P. No. 3819/99 the petitioners being regular students appeared in the Class Xllth examination for the academic session 1998-99 from the Centre called Narendra Singh Gour Higher Secondary School, village Karmoura, Tahsil Jatara. Their grievance is that they have done well in the examination yet the petitioners Nos. 1, 2 and 5 have been awarded zero marks in the subject of Science and petitioners Nos. 3 and 4 have been awarded zero marks in Mathematics. Their grievance also relates to the delayed publication as regards supplementary examination as a result of which they have been affected.
9. A return has been filed by the respondent/Board contending, inter alia, that Mr. A.K. Bansal, Head of the Flying Squad, reported to the Joint Director School Education, Sagar that in the examination centre Chandela and another centre bearing No, 21044 there was mass copying. The Collector, Tikamgarh also wrote a letter to the Chairman Board of Secondary Education that there was mass copying in certain centres, namely, Chandela, Digoda and Sigoda. After receiving such communication the Board took prompt action and issued instructions to the Valuation Centre. The Chief Valuer submitted a report that on a scrutiny of the answer paper there was mass copying. The report of the Chief Valuer has been brought on record as Annexure-R-4. Thereafter, the Result Committee took a decision to get the matter re-examined by the Centre Teachers and Assistant Professors. On a scrutiny it was found that out of 370 students who appeared in the Science subject from centre Chandela 274 students were involved in mass copying. Similarly in the subject of Mathematics out of 703 students 81 were found to be involved in mass copying. Keeping in view the aforesaid report the result of the petitioners who belong to the category of mass copying students was cancelled and they were awarded zero marks. As far as belated publication is concerned it has been averred that petitioners Nos. 1 to 3 appeared in the supplementary examination but became unsuccessful. Whereas petitioners Nos. 3 and 4 preferred not to appear in the same.
10. In W.P. No. 4818/99 the petitioners appeared in Class XII examination as regular students in the academic session 1998-99 from the Government High School Chandera, TahsilJatara District Tikamgarh. Their grievance is that though they have done well in the examination, they have been awarded zero marks. Their further grievance is also related to the delayed publication of the supplementary result.
The respondent/Board in its return reiterated the stand taken in earlier cases. With regard to supplementary examination the Board has stated that the petitioners Nos. 1 and 3 appeared in the supplementary examination but did not become successful.
11. In W.P. No. 4819/99 the grievance of the petitioner relates to awarding of zero marks in the subject of Science.
Mrs. J. Choudhary, learned counsel, has submitted that the Board in its return has clarified its stand and same may be taken into consideration.
12. In W.P. No. 4815/99 the petitioners, five in numbers, as regular students of Higher Secondary School Examination appeared in the Class XIIth examination in the academic session 1998-99. The petitioners Nos. 1 to 3 were awarded zero marks in the subject of Mathematics and petitioners Nos. 4 and 5 were awarded zero in Science. Their grievance also relates to the delayed publication of supplementary examination as a result of which they could not appear in same.
The respondent/Board has filed its return contending, inter alia; that there was mass copying as per report of the Deputy Director of Education, Tikamgarh. As far as supplementary examination is concerned it is put forth that petitioners Nos. 1, 2, 4 and 5 appeared in the supplementary examination but they failed in the same. Whereas petitioner No. 3 chose not to appear in the examination.
13. In W.P. No. 4220/99 the petitioners appeared in the Class Xllth examination in the academic session 1998-99. Their grievance is that though they have performed very well in the examination, they have been awarded zero marks in the subject of English, Their further grievance relates to delayed publication of supplementary examination.
A return has been filed by the respondent No. 1 /Board contending, inter alia, that there was report in respect of centres including centre from which the present petitioners appeared in the examination that there was mass copying. The Board conducted fair inquiry and arrived at the conclusion that there was mass copying, and accordingly, zero marks have been awarded in the subject of English.
14. I have heard Mr. S.P. Khare and Mr. Pranay Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioners, and Mrs. J. Choudhary, learned counsel for the Board. Mr. Khare, learned counsel, has raised two fold contentions, namely, that there was no material before the Board to come to conclusion that there was mass copying and the Board has proceeded in an arbitrary and capricious manner and taken harsh steps, and second, assuming that there was allegation of mass copying the examinees should have been given an opportunity of hearing to explain their stand and in absence of the same there is violation of principles of natural justice which creates an incurable dent in the order, making the same vitiated in the eye of law,
15. The first limb of argument does not detain me for long for the simple reason in W.P. No. 4820/99 the Board has received a complaint from the Deputy Director Education, Tikamgarh wherein he has indicated that the Deputy Collector has made surprise check and round that there was mass copying. On the basis of the said report the answer papers were scrutinised and it was found that there was mass copying. The matter was referred to the Result Committee and it also on proper verification of the answer papers came to the conclusion that the same reflected mass copying. Quite apart from the above, the Board has scanned each case and has come to the conclusion that out of 452 candidates 262 were involved in mass copying. A chart has been brought on record as Annexure-R-2. In view of this factual scenario there remains no iota of doubt that the petitioners were involved in mass copying. In all other writ petitions the Board has also acted after receipt of proper complaints and verifying the same.
16. The second limb of argument of Mr. Khare relates to violation of principles of natural justice. In this context I may profitably refer to the decision rendered in the case of Bihar School Examination Board v. Subhas Chandra Sinha, AIR 1970 SC 1269. In paragraph 13 of the aforesaid decision their Lordships expressed thus (at pages 1272-1273) :–
“This is not a case of any particular individual who is being charged with adoption of unfair means but of the conduct of all the examinees or at least a vast majority of them at a particular centre. If it is not a question of charging any one individual with unfair means but to condemn the examination as ineffective for the purpose it was held, must the Board given an opportunity to all the candidates to represent their cases ? We think not. It was not necessary for the Board to give an opportunity to the candidates if the examinations as a whole were being cancelled. The Board had not charged any one with unfair means so that he could claim to defend himself. The examination was vitiated by adoption of unfair means on a mass scale. In these circumstances it would be wrong to insist that the board must hold a detailed inquiry into the matter and examine each individual case to satisfy itself which of the candidates had not adopted unfair means, The examination as a whole had to go.”
The Apex Court further proceeded to lay down as under in paragraph 14:–
“…..The universities are responsible for their standards and the conduct of examinations. The essence of the examinations is that the worth of every person is appraised without any assistance from an outside source. If at a centre the whole body of students receive assistance and manage to secure success in the neighbourhood of 100% when at other centres are successful only at an average of 50%, it is obvious that the University or the Board must do something in the matter. It cannot hold a detailed quasi-judicial inquiry with a right to its alumni to plead and lead evidence etc. before the results are withheld or the examinations cancelled. If there is sufficient material on which it can be demonstrated that the university was right in its conclusion that the examinations ought to be cancelled then academic standards require that the university’s appreciation of the problem must be respected. It would not do for the Court to say that you should have examined all the candidates or even their representative with a view to ascertaining whether they had received assistance or not. To do this would encourage indiscipline if not also perjury.”
17. From the aforesaid enunciation of law It clearly flows that in a case of adoption of unfair means of mass copying the question of holding detailed enquiry in respect of each individual is ostracised as it is well neigh impossible to undertake such a herculean task. In a case of mass copying the Board has to take a drastic action. In the case at hand, more than 262 candidates were involved in mass copying and the said conclusion has been arrived at scrutiny in three levels by the various authorities of the Board and there is no justification to find fault with the decision of the Board. True it is, when there is mass scale copying and examination in respect of centres pertaining to some papers has been cancelled, there may be some innocent students who suffer but that will not be of paramount consideration or a governing factor to attract the concept of audi alteram partem. In the case of Madhyamic Shiksha Mandal v. Abhilash Shiksha Prasar Samiti (Civil Appeal No. 470 of 1997 decided on 21-1-1997) (Reported in 1998 (9) SCC 236) the Apex Court observed as under :–
“In the face of this material, we do not see any justification in the High Court having interfered with the decision taken by the Board to treat the examination as cancelled. It is unfortunate that the student community resorts to such methods to succeed in examination and then some of them come forward to contend that innocent students become victims of such misbehaviour of their companions. That cannot be helped. In such a situation the board is left with no alternative but to cancel the examination. It is extremely difficult for the board to identity the innocent students from those indulging students but one has to appreciate the situation in which the Board was placed and the alternatives that were available to it so far as this examination was concerned. It had no alternative but to cancel the results and we think, in the circumstances, they were justified in doing so. This should serve as a lesson to the students that such malpractice will not help them succeed in the examination and they may have to go through the drill once again,”
In view of the aforesaid 1 am of the considered opinion that the Board has to take a very practical decision in cancelling the results. When there are so many students it is not expected of the board to conduct a quasi judicial enquiry to arrrive at the truth or falsity of allegation against each examinee. May be in a given case when at the principal centre a single candidate is involved in malpractice the board while taking drastic decision against him may be required to follow the principles of naturaljustice but in a case of mass copying I am of the considered opinion that the principles of natural justice are not attracted. Requiring the Board to do so would usher total chaos and anarchy. In this context I may profitably refer to decision rendered in the case of Miss Reeta v. Berhampur University and Anr., AIR 1993 Orissa 27 wherein it has been held as under :
“19…..Further, the cancellation of her result was due to mass copying. In cases of mass copying, natural justice is not required to be complied with and as such it is apparent that the candidate in question does not get an opportunity to have his say in the matter…..”
18. Before parting with the case I may observe that students are the future of the nation and they are the real back bone. If they get themselves involved in adopting summary methods to achieve success the said success shall not only be short lived but would not be beneficial for them in the long run. An examination should hot be perceived as a battle and the professors and invigilators as enemies, The students, while appearing in an examination, must create an atmosphere where the professors and invigilators may realise that their presence in the examination hall is a formality, a redundant one. But presently the situation is just the reverse. The students take recourse to various tactics to instill a sense of fear in those who invigilate and supervise as a result of which sometimes the police force is requisitioned. Every student must remember by indulging in copying he does not acquire knowledge but becomes a liability to himself. A student who does not perform the duties of a student cannot claim the rights and cannot claim the privileges of a new generation. Every student must remember that he has to follow the rule of law. He must recall that Greek Philosopher Socrates re-fused to run away from the jail in spite of request by his desctples as he felt that it would amount to violation of law. A student should not forget that his primary duty is to study and appear in an examination in the most fair and scrupulous manner. Threatening the invigilators or superintendents is not an act of heroism but is one of cowardice. A student must keep in his mind that a hero is the ‘living light fountain’ and has ‘heroic nobleness’ a ‘natural luminary shining by the gift of heaven’ and involvement in copying not only destroys his basic native heroic nobility but sends him to the depths of abysmal hell. In my view no student would like to exhibit cowardice. He must sanguinely believe in the concept of upheaval as preached by Swami Vivekananda. Let conscience prevail and let the truth regain. Let copying be buried in its coffin falling which the Board shall be compelled to seek appropriate assistance from the State Government to control the situation at the examination centres. It is hoped that examination shall be conducted in peaceful, fair, scrupulous and dignified manner.
19. Resultantly, the writ petitions, being devoid of merit, stand dismissed.