Goa, Daman and Diu Board of Secondary Education Vs. Kumari Hema Laad and ors. - Court Judgment |
| SooperKanoon Citation | sooperkanoon.com/640937 |
| Subject | Constitution |
| Court | Supreme Court of India |
| Decided On | Aug-16-1984 |
| Case Number | Civil Appeal Nos. 4152 to 4157 of 1982 |
| Judge | D.A. Desai and; V. Balakrishnan Eradi, JJ. |
| Reported in | AIR1984SC1584; 1984(2)SCALE171; (1984)4SCC58; [1985]1SCR430; 1984(16)LC1108(SC) |
| Acts | Goa, Daman and Diu Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Board Act |
| Appellant | Goa, Daman and Diu Board of Secondary Education |
| Respondent | Kumari Hema Laad and ors. |
| Advocates: | Soli J. Sorabjee,; A.K. Verma and; O.C. Mathur, Advs |
| Cases Referred | Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education and Anr. v. Paritosh Bhupesh Kumarsheth and Ors.
|
| Prior history | From the Judgment and Order dated November 2, 1982 of the Bombay High Court Panaji Bench (Goa), in Special Civil Applications Writ Petitions No. 129, 110, 103, 101, 102 and 104 of 1980-- |
Excerpt:
.....and precise definition. it cannot be imprisoned in the straight-jacket of a cast-iron formula. rules of natural justice are not embodied rules. hence not possible to make an exhaustive catalogue of such rules. two fundamental maxims of natural justice have now become deeply and indelibly ingrained in the common consciousness of mankind as pre-eminently necessary to ensure that the law is applied impartially objectively and fairly. these twin principles are (i) audi alteram partem and (ii) nemo judex in re sua. audi alteram partem is a highly effective rule devised by the courts to ensure that a statutory authority arrives at a just decision and it is calculated to act as a healthy check on the abuse or misuse of power. its reach should not be narrowed and its applicability..........in the xii standard examination conducted by the goa, daman and diu board of secondary and higher secondary education and declared the provisions of clauses (1) and (2) of rule 37 of the rules framed by the administrator of goa, daman and diu under goa, daman and diu secondary and higher secondary education board act as ultra vires and invalid insofar as they prohibit inspection and/or revaluation of answer books. in reaching the said conclusion on the validity of the impugned rules the high court followed its earlier judgment in paritosh bhupesh kumarsheth and ors. v. maharashtra state board of secondary and higher secondary education, pune and anr. air 1981 bom 895-wherein regulation 104 (3) framed by the maharashtra state board of secondary and higher secondary education which.....
Judgment:Balakrishna Eradi, J.
1. These appeals by special leave are directed against the Judgment of the High Court of Bombay (Panaji Bench) dated 2.11.1982 whereby a Division Bench of the High Court allowed a batch of Writ Petitions filed by some students who had appeared in the XII standard examination conducted by the Goa, Daman and Diu Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education and declared the provisions of Clauses (1) and (2) of Rule 37 of the rules framed by the Administrator of Goa, Daman and Diu under Goa, Daman and Diu Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Board Act as ultra vires and invalid insofar as they prohibit inspection and/or revaluation of answer books. In reaching the said conclusion on the validity of the impugned rules the High Court followed its earlier Judgment in Paritosh Bhupesh Kumarsheth and Ors. v. Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education, Pune and Anr. AIR 1981 Bom 895-wherein Regulation 104 (3) framed by the Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education which is an identical provision prohibiting inspection and/or revaluation of answer books was declared illegal and ultra vires. The correctness of the said Judgment AIR 1981 Bom 895 came in for examination by this Court in Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education and Anr. v. Paritosh Bhupesh Kumarsheth and Ors. : [1985]1SCR29 . By Judgment dated 17th July 1984, this Court reversed the view taken by the Bombay High Court and upheld the validity of the impugned Clauses (1) and (3) of Regulation 104. The present case is fully covered by the dicta laid down in the said ruling. Hence we set aside the Judgment of the High Court and uphold the validity of Clauses (1) and (2) of Rule 37 of the rules framed under the Goa, Daman and Diu Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Board Act. These appeals are allowed and the writ petitions filed in the High Court will stand dismissed. The appellant will get its costs from the respondents.