1990 PLP 746 (SCMR)

(From the judgment dated 13‑9‑1989 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Writ Petition No.1878 of 1989). ‑‑‑Art.185(3)‑‑‑Leave to appeal‑‑‑Educational Institution‑‑‑Candidate was debarred by Authorities from appearing in any examination till Spring 1989 on the basis of certain allegations against him‑‑‑High Court; however, accepted Constitutional petition and declared orders of Authority to be illegal‑‑‑Period of disqualification of candidate to appear m examination, having since expired, petition for leave to appeal against order of High Court would be of an academic interest only and thus the case was not fit for granting leave‑‑‑Petition was dismissed with observation that finding of High Court that charges against candidate were vague and that there was no basis for taking action against him could not be supported. Ch. Ijaz Ahmad, Advocate Supreme Court and Tanvir Ahmad, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners. Date of hearing: 28th November, 1989. SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.‑‑‑The respondent was a candidate in the Intermediate Examination conducted by the Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Lahore. On 4‑5‑1988 he reached the Examination Centre 25 minutes after the appointed time and immediately thereafter started creating disturbance by asking answers to the questions in the paper from the other candidates. When he was stopped by the supervising staff he started quarrelling with them. He refused to write down his roll number on the answer book and when asked to give a written explanation he declined to do so. On the report submitted by the Senior Superintendent of the Centre, the Disciplinary Committee of the Board initiated proceedings against him. He submitted a reply to the allegations against him. After hearing him in person the Disciplinary Committee debarred him from appearing in any examination till Spring 1989. He preferred an appeal before the Committee of Appeal which was dismissed. fie then filed a writ petition in the High Court. A learned Single Judge accepted the writ petition and declared the orders of the Disciplinary Committee and the Committee of Appeal to be without lawful authority on the ground that the charges were vague on which action could not be taken against the respondent. The Board as well as the Disciplinary Committee seek leave to appeal from the order of the High Court.

2. It is to be noticed that the period of disqualification has since expired. This petition is therefore now of an academic interest only. This is thus not a fit case for granting leave. We may however add that we are unable to support the finding of the learned Single Judge that the charges against the respondent were vague and there was no basis for taking action against the respondent. With these observations, the petition is dismissed, H.B.T.B‑152/S Petition dismissed.