This Court has heard the learned counsel for the petitioner
and the learned Additional Solicitor General for the respondents.
The above writ petition was filed by way of Public Interest Litigation
by one Raj Kumar Gupta. The petitioner of this writ petition wants to raise
the issue of leakage of question papers of various examinations and
that the frequent leakage of question papers has shaken the confidence
of honest students and their parents on the system and has caused great harassment
and depression on them.
This Court, upon hearing the learned counsel, issued notice
to the Union of India and100 others. The Union of India has also filed their counter affidavit
through its Secretary, Central Board of Secondary Education, New120 Delhi. Respondent No. 2 has also
filed its counter affidavit, through its Under Secretary, Department
of Secondary and Higher Education, Ministry of Human Resource
Development, New Delhi.
When the matter was listed on
20.11.2006, we directed the Union of India to file an affidavit
along with annexures in the sealed cover. On 11.12.2006, the Union of India
placed before us a report in sealed cover in regard to the security
measures taken200 by the CAT group of various IIMs in the matter of securing
the question papers from the time that they are set, to the time that
they are finally evaluated and the results declared including security240 measures in regard to transportation and storage of question papers.
The Registrar General was directed to keep the same in a sealed
cover in safe custody and place the same before the Court when it was required.
On 08.01.2007, we directed the Registry to circulate the Report
in closed envelope to both of us.300 Accordingly, the Report was circulated to both of us.
We have carefully perused the
Report and we return the same to the learned Additional Solicitor General.
We are satisfied that the Union of India has taken concrete steps
in order to maintain the secrecy and sanctity of the
examinations. The steps taken by the Central Board of Secondary Education
have360 also been explained in detail. It is
also stated that in view of the leakage of All India Pre-Medical
Entrance Examination, 2004 question paper, the Central Board of
Secondary Education has reviewed and scrutinized its system to prevent400 re-occurrence of such incidence
and additional measures of security have been introduced during paper
setting, printing of question paper, mode of transport of question paper to the
examination centres and also the preparation of examination results. It
is also submitted in the counter affidavit that the CBSE rescheduled
All India Pre-Medical Entrance (Preliminary) Examination, 2004 within a week's
time and conducted it successfully on 17.04.2004.
We have perused the counter affidavit filed480 by respondent No. 2. It is
stated therein that the CAT, 2003 which was held on500 November 23, 2003 was
alleged to have been tainted by leakage of the question paper.
The said examination was, therefore, cancelled. On February 1, 2004, a
meeting of the CAT group was held and the entire procedure for the CAT was
reviewed. It is also further explained in regard to the several
stringent measures in respect of security of the printing
process, security for booklets, test construction security, on-site security,
deployment of faculty and oversight staff, security of internal communication
systems, storage of question papers and answer sheets and security audit
so600 as to ensure the sanctity
of the examination process. Since adequate and satisfactory steps have
already been taken for securing the sanctity of the admission process and
by recording the confidential report submitted by the Union of India, we
express our sincere hope that the steps taken by the Union of India will be
implemented strictly in letter and spirit. The writ petition stands
disposed of accordingly.
In these appeals, a short but an
important question that arises for consideration is whether the right to fly
the National Flag by Indian citizen is a fundamental right within the
meaning of700 Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India. Naveen Jindal, the
respondent herein, is a Joint Managing Director of720 a public limited company
incorporated under the Companies Act. He was flying National Flag at the office
premises of his factory. He was not allowed to do so by the Government
officials on the ground that the same is impermissible under the Flag
Code of India.
Questioning the said action, the respondent filed a writ
petition before the High Court, inter alia, on the ground that no law could
prohibit flying of National Flag by Indian citizens. Flying of National800 Flag with respect and dignity
being a fundamental right, the Flag Code which contains only executive instructions
of the Government of India and, thus, being not a law, cannot be considered
to have imposed reasonable restrictions in respect thereof within840 the meaning of clause (2) of
Article 19 of the Constitution of India.
National Flags are intended to project the identity of
the country they represent and foster national spirit. Their distinctive
designs and colours embody each nation's particular character and proclaim the
country's separate existence. Thus, it is veritably common to all
nations that a national flag has a900 great amount of significance. In order that the
respect and dignity of the flag be fostered and maintained, several
countries have laid down rules relating to the use, display, etc. of the flag,
along with rules to provide against the burning, mutilation and destruction
of the flag. At this stage, we would like to deal with the
question as to960 how flying of national flag is
understood by other countries. The question at hand relates to how many
countries allow the free use of the national flag by the citizens. In stark
contrast to the role the flag has played1000 in the freedom struggles, in
several countries, the usage of the flag has become a virtual sole prerogative
of the Government. Countries like Canada and Brazil allow free use of
the flag by individuals, with the only rider being that the flag is treated
with dignity and respect and flown and displayed properly. The US Flag Code
advocates the flying of the flag with dignity and prohibits mutilation
or dishonour in public and its use as costumes, athletic uniforms,
cushions,1080 handkerchiefs, etc.
