M.S.H. QURAISHI, J.--The petitioner was punished by the authorities of the Board of Intermediate & Secondary Education, for the use of unfair-means in the examination, with which the High Court refused to interfere in the exercise of its writ jurisdiction.
2. The contention is that the punishment had been awarded by the Enquiry Officer who was not competent to do so as under rule 17 of the Rules relevant to the conduct of examinations, the Standing Committee or, if that Committee is not unanimous, the Chairman himself or the Board, if the matter is referred by the Chairman to it, can take a decision. The point, it appears, had been taken in ground (k) of the grounds in the writ petition but the High Court's judgment is silent about it, giving rise to a presumption that the point had not been urged during the hearing of the writ petition. In any case, we find that the petitioner, though he had in the memorandum of appeal generally questioned the jurisdiction of the Enquiry Officer, had not taken the objection specifically there. It is, therefore, not a fit case for interference by this Court. The petition is dismissed.