2000 PLP 1124 (CLC)

Qazi Zakiuddin Khan for Petitioners. Mrs. Nusrat Yasmeen for Respondents. Date of hearing: 22nd December, 1999. MALIK HAMID SAEED, J.‑‑‑ Muhammad Jamil and 35 others, petitioners, have filed this writ petition for issuing directions to the respondents to declare the result of the petitioners in respect of their examination of Master of Education, held in September/October, 1998.

2. Brief facts of the case are that respondent No.4, Sarhad Institute of Education, N.‑W.F.P., Peshawar, started giving training to the Bachelor of Education and the University of Peshawar granted affiliation to the said Institute for B.Ed discipline. The affiliation of the Institute to the discipline of M.Ed. was, however, deferred till satisfactory result of B.Ed.

3. The respondent No.4, however, started classes of M.Ed. by granting admissions to the petitioners and sent their examination forms to the University authorities, but the same were returned to respondent No.4 on account of non‑affiliation of the Institute for M.Ed. discipline. The respondent No.4 Institute filed Writ Petition No. 1198 of 1998 in this Court, wherein pre‑admission notice to the respondents was given on 3‑9‑1998 and under C.M. No.1544 of 1998, the prayer of the respondent No.4 was accepted to the extent that the students of the petitioner's Institute shall appear in the M.Ed. examination to .be held on 4‑9‑1998 at their own risk and costs without prejudice to the merits of the petition. It was under the directions of this Court, that the University Authorities accepted the examination forms of the petitioners and allowed them to take part in the M.Ed. Examination. Thereafter, the writ petition came up for hearing on pre‑admission notice on 13‑5‑1999 and the writ petition was disposed of in the following terms:‑ "After hearing the learned counsel for the parties we are of the view that the writ petition is not competent under section 31(4) of the University of Peshawar Act, 1974. The representation of the petitioner has to be decided first by the Syndicate, University of Peshawar which has not yet been decided. We would, therefore, in the circumstances direct the Syndicate, University of Peshawar to dispose of the representation filed by the petitioner within a period of one month. The result of candidates who were provisionally allowed to appear in the M.Ed. Examination by this Court vide order, dated 3=9‑1998 shall be subject to the decision of there presentation by the Syndicate, University of Peshawar. This writ petition is accordingly disposed of alongwith C. Ms."

4. In compliance with the orders of this Court, dated 13‑5‑1999, the respondents considered the representation of Srahed Institute of Education, Hayatabad, Peshawar, respondent No.4, and observed that the said institute has admitted the students in M.Ed. Classes by violating clause 31(1) of the University of Peshawar Act, 1974 and section 16 of the Affiliation Rules framed under clause 31(3) of the University of Peshawar Act, 1974. Accordingly, the representation was rejected by the Syndicate on 28‑6‑1999. Hence the present writ petition.

5. Keeping in view the above facts, at present the respondent No.4 Institute is not affiliated with the University of Peshawar for M.Ed. Classes and the students/petitioners have no right to appear in the M.Ed. Examination of the University of Peshawar. The students of the Institute were allowed to take part in the M.Ed. Examination, which were going to be held on 4‑9‑1998, but at their own cost and risk without prejudice to the , merits of the petition, which writ petition was still pending at that time. The said writ petition stood decided on 13‑5‑1999 wherein it was specifically mentioned that the result of the candidates who were provisionally allowed to appear in the M.Ed. Examination by this Court vide order, dated 3‑9‑1998 shall be subject to the decision of the representation by the Syndicate, University of Peshawar. The Syndicate, thereafter, in its meeting held on 28‑6‑1999 rejected the representation of Sarhad Institute of Education, Peshawar.

6. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners is unable to show any good ground for interference in presence of the broad fact that the admission granted to the petitioners in the said Institute was without affiliation of the Institute with the University of Peshawar for M‑Ed. discipline and it was in violation of certain provisions of the University of Peshawar Act. By now, the representation 'made by the said Institute has already been rejected by the Syndicate. We, therefore, find ourselves unable to issue any direction to the respondents to declare the result of the petitioners of M.Ed. Examination, for which the petitio ners were given permission to appear in the said examination by this Court at their own risk and cost without prejudice to the merits of the case and subject to the decision of the Syndicate on the representation of respondent No.4 which representation has been rejected. The matter has already been decided in the earlier writ petition. .

7. This writ petition being without any substance is hereby dismissed in limine alongwith C.M. , Q.M.H./M.A.K./32/P Petition dismissed.