Somnath Iyer, J.
(1) The petitioner before us applied for admission in June 1960 to the pre-University Class in the Government Intermediate College, Bangalore. On July 12, 1960, he was informed that he had been admitted to that class whereupon he paid the necessary fee. It appears that his admission was preceded by an interview which was made by the Members of the Committee who had to make that interview before whom the petitioner presented himself for that purpose. On July 18, 1960, the petitioner was informed by the Principal of that College that his admission had been revoked as a result of the discovery filed some false statement made by him in his application form. That false statement as has been explained to us now, although the communication sent by the Principal of that College to the petitioner itself did not refer to it expressly, consisted of the statement against Col. 5 of his application from that the last institution attended by the petitioner was the Arya Vidhya Shala High School in the year 1950 after passing his S.S. L.C. Examination, he attended at least three more institutions. It now admitted on behalf of the petitioner by his advocate Mr. Vasupal Rao that in the year 1952 the petitioner got himself admitted into the Arts section of the Intermediate College, Bangalore and that he did not pass the examination until the year 1957. During the interregnum, it is also now admitted that he attended another institution known as Ram Narayan Chellaram College of Commerce.
Mr. Vasupal Rao has explained to us that the petitioner did not stay in that college for a long time and that he gave up his course of studies in that college within about a couple a months after he joined it. It is further admitted that in the year 1957 the petitioner joined the St. Joseph College, Bangalore, where he put in attendance for the First Year B.A. class for not more than 2 or 3 months. After he left the St. Joseph's College in that way, according to the petitioner, he has been attending the Pathological Laboratory of the Victoria Hospital, Bangalore where he is working as Technician. It was when he was working in the Victoria Hospital as Technician that the applied for admission to the Government Intermediate College, Bangalore. But in First Year application form against Col. 5 as we have mention explained what was attended by him was the Arya Vidhya Sahala High School, Bangalore. In order to make it appear that he attended no other institutions after he left the Arya Vidhya Shala High School, he produced along with the application form a certificate purporting to be one granted to him by the Arya Vidhya Shala High School.
(2) The argument addressed on behalf of the learned Government Pleader was that the statement made by the petitioner against Col. 5 of his application form was, in the circumstances, a willful concealment of the fact that between the years 1950 and 1957 he was a student of atleast three institutions viz. The Government Intermediate College, the Ram Narayan Chellaram College of Commerce and the St. Joseph's College. In paragraph 3 of the Rejoinder affidavit produced by the respondent, of which the dependent is Mr. F. J. Noronha, Principal of the Government Intermediate College, it is stated that the petitioner, when the left the Ram Narayan Chellaram College of Commerce, he was a defaulter in regard to the payment of a sum of Rs. 27/- which he owed to that College. Mr. Santhanam who is a Reader in Chemistry in the College with which we are concerned in this case, has sworn to an affidavit that he was a Member of the Admission Committee of the Bangalore Intermediate College.
According to his affidavit, on July 17,1960, the petitioner came to his residence at about 9-30 p.m. and admitted before him that he had made a false statement in his application for admission and that he had omitted to state in that application form that he had attended three more institutions after he left the Arya Vidhya Shala High School. Mr. Santhanam proceeded to state in this affidavit that the petitioner felt, penitent for having made that false statement and begged to be excused. Mr. Noronha has sworn to another affidavit in which he stated that the petitioner, after coming to know that the College authorities intended to take action against him for making false statements in his application form, approached Mr. Santhanam, as a stated by him in his affidavit, and made a confession of his guilt.
(3) Although the petitioner has repudiated the allegation made in the affidavit of Mr. Santhanam as to the confession made to Mr. Santhanam that he had made a false statement in his application form, it is clear that it would be impossible for us to think that what is stated by Mr. Santhanam in his affidavit can be anything but the truth, particularly since the petitioner in his affidavit did admit that he met Mr. Santhanam although he gave July 11,1960 as the date on which he met him. Between the petitioner and Mr. Santhanam, it is clear the choice is obvious when we should made a selection of the person would was speaking the truth.
(4) The petitioner appears to have been a rolling stone wandering from College to College after he got out of the Arya Vidhya Sahala High School in the year 1950. The petitioner has not at all placed any material in repudiation of the statement contained in the affidavit of Mr. Noronha College of Commerce he owed that college a sum of Rs. 27/-. The transfer certificate which the petitioner along with application form has, as the learned Government Pleader very properly pointed out to us, its own curious features. It is clear that since the petitioner joined three more institutions after he left the Arya Vidhya Sahala High School, he must have obtained form the Arya Vidhya Shala High School, at least three transfer certificates for the purposes of joining those institutions. But nevertheless the transfer certificate which the petitioner produced with the application form, which he presented to the Government Intermediate College in the year 1960, did not all purport to be a duplicate of the certificates which the petitioner had been granted earlier and it appears to us extremely suspicious that the petitioner was again able to obtain form the Arya Vidhya Shala High School a fourth transfer certificate which did not contain any indication that the certificate was a duplicate of ht earlier certificates.
Although Mr. Vasupal Rao pleaded before us that the omission on the part of the petitioner to disclose the fact that he had attended three more institutions before he applied for admission that the College with which we are concerned, was due to an innocent belief in his mind that what he had to disclose against Col. 5 was only the institution which he had attended from which he passed the S.S.L.C. Examination, it does not appear to us that the mis-statement against Col. 5 was an innocent misrepresentation in the circumstances, and particularly having regard to the fact that the petitioner left the Ram Narayan Chellaram College of Commerce without paying up the amount due from him to that institution which indicates that the concealment by the petitioner of ht effect that he had attended that college and two other colleges was deliberate and willful. It is common knowledge that when a person applied for admission to one college, he should satisfy the authorities regulation admission to that college that he does not owe any money to any other institution which he may have previously attended and that his own academical record in those institutions was above blemish. That is the purpose for which a person applying for admission that an institutions is required to state correct, accurately and honestly the name of the institutions which he last attended. It is true Col. 5 is not as full and precise as it should be. Although that column does not expressly require the applicant to state the name of the institution which was attended by him immediately before he made the application for admission its meaning is that the institutions to be named by him is the institutions which he attended immediately before he presented the application for admission to the college to which he was seeking admission.
(5) We must, therefore, hold that the non-disclosure of the St. Joseph's College, which was the last institution attended by the petitioner before he applied for admission that he Government Intermediate College, Bangalore was deliberate addition was designed to mis lead the authorities, who had to decide whether he was eligible for admission, into thinking that the only institution which he attended before he sought admission was the Arya Vidya Shala High School, thus making it impossible for them to investigate into the antecedent s of his career as a student in the college which he had attended immediately before he made his application form for admission.
(6) But it was urged by Mr. Vasupal Rao that, even so, in the absence of any power conferred on the college authorities to revoke the admission once made on the ground of misrepresentation practiced by the student the order made by the further respondent in this case revoking his admission was with the power the and beyond his competence. We are not satisfied that his argument is substantial. If as we have found, the information required to be stated against Column 5 was material for the purpose o admission, it non-disclosure was equally material. It was in our opinion, foundation appeal to he admission of the student who was seeking admission, and if it is subsequently discovered that the authorities admitted of the student into their college on the basis of misrepresentation deliberately made, it is not necessary for the authorities to point out any express source of the power to revoke the admission which was the result of the misrepresentation made by the student. That power, in our opinion, is implicit in the requirement to state accurately and honestly the facts which the student is required to state.
(7) The argument that there was some violation of the rules of natural justice by the 4th respondent in this case appears to us also to be quite insubstantial. If we believe the affidavit of Mr. Santhanam as we do, in which he stated that the petitioner went and asked for his pardon for the misdemeanor committed by him in making a false statement, and if that confession was the out come of a fear generated in the mind of the petitioner that the college authorities might take more serious action against him for the misstatement made by him, it is clear that the revocation of the admission made by the college, impugned by the petitioner, was not vitiated by any non-compliance on the part of the Principal with the rules of the natural justice. Even if the petitioner had been asked to explain why he had made a false statement, he would have said nothing more than what he had stated before Mr. Santhanam it was not explained to us what better position the petitioner would have occupied if he had been given an opportunity to explain why he made a false statement against Col. 5. It would have been impossible, in our opinion, for the petitioner, in the circumstances, to escape from the consequences of his own misstatement.
(8) It is, in our opinion, of the greatest importance that students seeking admission to the institutions which they wish to enter should make a full, correct and accurate statement of the particulars which they are required to give or furnish. In these days when thousands of applicants seek admission to the various Colleges of the country, it would be impossible to expect the Members of the Committee selecting the students for admission to make a detailed investigation or scrutiny into the truth or otherwise of each one of the particulars which the applicant is required to give. If they should be expected to do so, the admission machinery would get paralysed and the entire year would be insufficient for such scrutiny. The Members of the Committee deciding the selection must be depend upon the truth of the information given by the applicants themselves and if it should turn out, as it has been made by a student who nevertheless get himself admitted, it is too much for any one to suggest that it does not lie in the power of the college authorities to revoke the admission and correct their own mistake which was induced by the applicant himself.
(9) In the view that we take, this Writ Petition must fail and it is accordingly dismissed. This is, however, not a case in which was should make any direction in regard to costs. It would be enough for us to issue a direction to the respondent the petitioner when he joined the college, should be forthwith refunded to him.
(10) Petition dismissed.