The High Court dismissed an appeal challenging the cancellation of MBBS admission for cheating. The court held that despite delay, the adverse independent forensic report validating the allegation of impersonation made the order sustainable.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Special Appeal Writ No.811/2021
Santoshi Meena S/o Shri Lajja Ram Meena, aged about 30 years, R/o Umreh Tehsil Badi, District Dholpur, Rajasthan.
----Appellant
Versus
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. R.S. Mehta For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AKIL KURESHI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA
Order
17/11/2021
This appeal is directed against the judgment of learned Single Judge dated 10/08/2021 passed in Writ Petition No.3512/2021.
Briefly stated the facts are that the petitioner was a student of Medical College of respondent No.3. She had appeared in the M.B.B.S. examination in the year 2009. The authorities alleged that the petitioner had committed cheating and impersonation in such examination. An inquiry report was prepared prima-facie suggesting examination malpractice by the petitioner and 15 other similar candidates. Based on such report, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner on 20/04/2011 by the authorities. On
(2 of 4)
[SAW-811/2021]
12/05/2011, the authorities cancelled the admission of the petitioner and other students. The petitioner challenged such decision by filing Writ Petition No.7913/2011. On 27/01/2014, the learned Single Judge of this Court disposed of the writ petition and required the authorities to obtain an independent FSL report. In such order, it was provided that if the report comes adverse to the petitioners then the impugned order would become effective and thereby admission of the students would be treated as cancelled. The authorities thereupon obtained such a report from Finger Print Division, Central Forensic Science Laboratory, Central Bureau of Investigation, New Delhi. Such report was adverse to the petitioner. The Rajasthan University of Health Sciences therefore passed an order on 17/11/2017 and after decision of the learned Single Judge dated 27/01/2014 treated the petitioner’s admission as cancelled.
Thereupon, the petitioner first filed Writ Petition No.9581/2017 and sought a direction from the court to allow her to appear in the Third Professional M.B.B.S. Part-II Examination which was to be held in June, 2017. This petition was dismissed by an order dated 23/08/2017 as being misdirected since the order of cancellation of the admission had attained finality. Thereafter, in the year 2021, the petitioner filed the present petition in which she has challenged the said order dated 17/11/2017 treating her admission as cancelled. She has further prayed for direction to declare the results of the examination she had appeared in and further to allow her to compete the remaining course of M.B.B.S. This petition came to be dismissed by the learned Single Judge on the grounds of delay and laches. It was observed that the
(3 of 4)
[SAW-811/2021]
impugned order was passed on 17/11/2017, whereas the petitioner has filed the petition fours years later.
We have heard learned counsel for the appellant at a
considerable length.
He submitted that the petitioner had before filing the present petition approached the High Court may be in a wrong litigation being mis-advised. However, there was no intention on the part of the petitioner to forego the challenge and petition should not have been dismissed on the ground of delay and laches.
Even if we ignore the considerable delay in filing the writ petition against the order of cancellation of admission of the petitioner, on merits also the petitioner has no case. As noted long back in the year 2009, the petitioner was allegedly caught cheating and impersonation in MBBS examination. The decision of the authority to cancel her admission came to be interfered by the learned Single Judge in a limited way back. The authorities were required to obtain an independent FSL opinion. It was clarified that if the opinion of the FSL is adverse to the petitioner only the cancellation order would revive. This is exactly what happened. The University obtained a report of Finger Print Division, Central Forensic Science Laboratory, Central Bureau of Investigation, New Delhi. The report was adverse to the petitioner. A fresh order therefore was passed on 17/11/2017 treating her admission as cancelled. The petitioner has challenged the order. There is no formal challenge to the FSL report. Even if we ignore this minor technicality, the petitioner has to successfully impinge the findings of the report so as to sustain the challenge against the order dated 17/11/2017. In the earlier round of litigation, the learned Single Judge had kept a small window open for the petitioner
(4 of 4)
[SAW-811/2021]
namely; the authorities to obtain a fresh report of FSL. All other issues should be seem to have been terminated. The future of the petitioner’s admission would depend on the contents of such report. Now that the report is adverse to the petitioner, she cannot avoid the consequences thereof. Even otherwise, there is no material or worthy arguments raised before us to shake the validity of the report itself. The report has been submitted by an independent agency. In the field requiring technical expertise, intervention by the court would be rare and exceptional. In any case, the disputed question such as correctness of the FSL report on the identity of thumb impressions, would not be examined in a writ petition.
For such reasons, appeal is dismissed.
(REKHA BORANA),J
(AKIL KURESHI),CJ
ANIL GOYAL/B.M. GANDHI/8
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should allow the appellant's admission challenge despite considerable delay and laches.
Whether the cancellation of admission is valid given an adverse forensic report confirming cheating and impersonation.
Santoshi Meena
Rajasthan University of Health Sciences
Government of Rajasthan
RNT Medical College
Akil Kureshi
Rekha Borana
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
