HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 2482 of 2024 (M/S) Aryansh Singh ….....Petitioner Versus GB Pant University of Agriculture and Technology and Another ….….Respondents Present:- Ms. Priyanka Agrawal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. S.S. Lingwal, Advocate for the respondents, through video conferencing. Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral) By means of the instant writ petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs:- (i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 27.08.2024, passed by the Registrar of the respondent no.1 university qua the petitioner, whereby the petitioner has been debarred for academic year 2023-2024 of B.Tech (Electronics and Communication) course. (Annexure No.2) (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to permit the petitioner to continue with the 4th year of Btech (Electronics and Communication) Course from the respondent university. (iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to manually allow the registration for Semester VII (Academic Year 2024- 2025) as the online portal for the petitioner for accepting registration is blocked. (iv) Issue any other writ, order or direction which this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper. 2 (v) Award cost of the petition. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 3. The petitioner is a student of B.Tech in GB Pant University of Agriculture and Technology University, Pantnagar, District Udham Singh Nagar. He was found using unfair means in the examination, therefore, he was debarred from the academic year 2023- 24. It is put to challenge in this writ petition. 4. Pleadings have been exchanged. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the controversy is squarely covered by the judgment dated 23.03.2017 passed by this Court in the case of Mr. Udit Singh Vs. Vice Chancellor Govind Ballabh Pant University Pantnagar and Another, 2017 SCC OnLine Utt 383. 6. This fact is admitted by learned counsel for the respondents. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 27.08.2024 is set aside. 8. Now, the Vice-Chancellor of the university shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and proceed in the matter, as per the directions contained in Para 17 of the judgment in the case of Udit Singh (supra), which reads as follows:- 17. Having passed the abovesaid order, this Court not only would give an opportunity to the Vice-Chancellor but, on the other hand, would request the Vice-Chancellor to appreciate the entire case including the report of the University Discipline Committee and other evidence on record as well as the statement of the petitioner preferably after giving a personal hearing to the student and thereafter take a decision in the matter preferable within two weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order. A personal hearing, however, would not mean that the petitioner would be represented by any 3 other person, including a lawyer. For abundant precaution, the petitioner would be permitted to appear in the 2nd semester classes till the decision is finally taken by the Vice-Chancellor. It is made clear that this permission to the petitioner to appear in the second semester classes should not be taken as any comment on the merit of his case. The Vice-Chancellor must take a decision on the merit of the case, keeping all aspects into consideration, including the discipline of the institute. (Ravindra Maithani, J) 06.06.2025 Ravi Bisht