RAM PREETI YADAV versus U.P. BOARD OF HIGH SCHOOL AND INTERMEDIATE EDUCATION AND ORS.

Citation: [2003] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 352 · Decided: 03-09-2003 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: V.N. KHARE · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
RAM PREETI Y ADA V 
v. 
U.P. BOARD OF HIGH SCHOOL AND INTERMEDIATE 
EDUCATION AND ORS. 
SEPTEMBER 3, 2003 
[V.N. KHARE, CJ. AND S.B. SINHA, J.] 
Education: 
Intermediate Examinations-Candidate using unfair means-
C Provisional mark-sheet-Effect of-Result of a private candidate withheld 
as being a suspected case of using unfair means-Provisional mark sheet 
issued without showing "W.B." (i.e. res1.-lt withheld)-Admission to B.A. 
course obtained by candidate-Board of High School and Intermediate 
Examinations cancelled examination of candidate-Thereafter another 
D provisional mark sheet issued by the Principal of the College to the 
candidate showing the words "W.B." therein-Later, Principal of the 
College informing the candidate that his result was cancelled-Writ 
petition of candidate allowed by High Court-Held, when the Principal of 
the College was made known by the Board about cancelling the examination 
E of the candidate, issuance of another mark sheet in his favour with the 
words "W.B." is a matter of great suspicion-It is evident that a fraud was 
committed-The candidate is the sole beneficiary to the said fraud and it, 
as such, must be presumed that he was a party theretcr--The letter issued 
by Principal of the College at a belated stage informing the candidate 
F about cancellation of his examination, in the circumstances, is stated to 
have given rise to a fresh cause of action as earlier writ petition of the 
candidate seeking declaration of his result had been dismissed-The plea 
of the candidate that the Board be directed to give an opportunity of 
hearing to him at this stage cannot be acceded tcr--There is no equity in 
favour of the candidate inasmuch as he knew that his result had been 
G withheld because of the a/legation of having used unfair means in the 
examination-Suppressing this fact he took admission and studied further-
Fraud-Presumption as regards party theretcr--Equity. 
Derry v. Peek, (1889114 AC 337and Lazarua Estate v. Berly, (1956) 
H 1 All ER 341, referred to. 
352 
R. P. YADAV "· U.P. BOARD OF HIGH SCHOOL AND INTERMEDIATE EDUCTION 353 
SP. Chengalvaraya Naidu v. Jagannath, [1994) l SCC I, referred A 
to. 
Administrative Law: 
Natural justice-Opportunity of hearing-Intermediate examination-
Mass copying-Result of the candidate withheld and later his examination B 
cancelled-Candidate obtained provisional mark sheet without any 
indication of withholding result-Obtained admission to B.A. course on the 
basis thereof and studied further-Later challenged the order of cancellation 
of his examination on the ground that he was not communicated the order 
!ilnd that he was not given an opportunity of hearing-Held, it is the positive C 
case of the Board that an opportunity of hearing had been given to him-
Besides, in a case of mass copying the principles of natural justice need not 
be strictly complied with-Furthermore, it is the admitted case of the parties 
that the records have been weeded out-High Court was not correct in 
proceeding on the basis that candidate was not communicated with the 
result-It is expected that a student who has taken admission on the basis D 
of a provisional mark-sheet would keep a watch over the entire situation 
and would make repeated enquiries as to what actions have been taken by 
the authority concerned in the matter and why final mark-sheet has not been 
issued-A presumption against him must be raised particularly having regard 
to the fact that he had not been able to produce any material to show as to 
why no attempt was made by him to obtain a final marks sheet and/or E 
certificate for passing the examination. 
Madhyamic Shiksha Manda!, MP. v. Abhilash Shiksha Prasar Samiti 
and Ors., (1998) 9 SCC 236, relied on. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 4034 of p 
2001. 
From the Judgm.ent and Order dated 7.12.99 of the Allahabad High 
Court in S.A. No. 450 of 1998. 
Y.P. Singh, Chatanya Siddharth, Mukesh K. Sharma and Debasis G 
Misra for the Appellant. 
Dinesh Dwivedi, S. Bhatnagar, Navin Prakash and Kamlendra Mishra 
for the Respondents. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
H 
354 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2003] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 
A 
In the year 1984, respondent No. 3 herein Mahendra Pratap Yadav 
appeared as a private candidate in the Intermediate Examination conducted 
by U.P. Board of High School & Intermediate Education from Janta Inter 
College, Azamgarh (U.P.). When the results of Intermediate Examination 
of
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.