Rajasthan High Court: In a writ petition filed by a JEE (Main) 2025 aspirant (petitioner), challenging the respondent’s decision to withhold his result for alleged use of Unfair Means and debar him from academic sessions 2025-26 and 2026-27 without affording him an opportunity of hearing, the single Judge Bench of Anoop Kumar Dhand, J., emphasizing the principle of natural justice, directed the respondent to take a fresh decision after providing due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
Background:
The petitioner appeared in the JEE (Main) 2025 Examination conducted by the National Testing Agency (NTA). Upon the declaration of results for other candidates, the petitioner’s result was withheld, and he was subsequently debarred from appearing in the examination for the academic sessions 2025-26 and 2026-27, on the grounds of allegedly using unfair means. The respondent’s decision was based on alleged CCTV footage showing the petitioner looking into the answer sheet of a fellow candidate seated nearby.
Decision:
The Court noted that the decision of debarment was taken by the respondents without hearing the petitioner. This action constituted a clear violation of the principle of natural justice- “audi alteram partem”, which means that an opportunity of hearing must be provided to the other party before any adverse or stigmatic order is passed against an individual.
The Court further noted that the penalty inflicted upon the petitioner would certainly spoil his career and he will carry the stigma with him for all times to come and will create an impediment whenever he comes forward to get public employment. The Court emphasized that a stigmatic order, which could spoil a person’s career and create future impediments, creates a bounden duty on the authority concerned to provide him opportunity of hearing, before passing such an order.
Therefore, the action taken by the respondents could not be approved by the Court. Consequently, the Court directed the respondents to take a fresh decision in the matter after affording a due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. They were instructed to pass an appropriate, reasoned, and speaking order after hearing the petitioner’s side.
[Mahir Bishnoi v. National Testing Agency, 2025:RJ-JP:22330, decided on 27-05-2025]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For the Petitioner: Deepak Bishnoi, Advocate
For the Respondent: M.S. Raghav, Mananjay Singh Rathore, Advocates