1991 PLP 1827 (SCMR)
CHAIRMAN, ADMISSION BOARD OF MEDICAL COLLEGES OF THE PUNJAB and another — Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD AYUB and another — Respondents
| Citation | 1991 PLP 1827 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah and S. Usman Ali Shah, JJ |
| Parties | CHAIRMAN, ADMISSION BOARD OF MEDICAL COLLEGES OF THE PUNJAB and another — Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD AYUB and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1991 PLP 1827 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1991 PLP 1827 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah and S. Usman Ali Shah, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1991 PLP 1827 (SCMR) (CHAIRMAN, ADMISSION BOARD OF MEDICAL COLLEGES OF THE PUNJAB and another — Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD AYUB and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- M.M. Saeed Beg, Advocate Supreme Court and Rao Muhammad Yousaf Khan, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
- Rana MA. Qadri, Advocate-on-Record for Respondents.
- M.M. Saeed Beg, Advocate Supreme Court and Rao Muhammad Yousaf Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
- Rana MA. Qadri, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment dated 17-2-1987 of the Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, in Writ Petition No.1414 of 1986)
Art. 185(3)
Admission of respondent (No.1) in Medical College was cancelled by Authority on ground that it was given to respondent on a wrong assumption with regard to his better position on account of an inadvertent mistake in wrong feeding of computer and in his place respondent (No.2) was granted admission
Respondent (No. 2) by now had studied for two years while it was not known as to what happened to respondent (No.1)
While respondent (No.1) is out of college and respondent (No.2) is regularly studying, it is just and fair in order to see whether justice has been done to both respondents to examine the case further
Case being fit for further consideration, leave was granted and petition was converted into appeal.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.‑‑‑Leave to appeal has been sought; against an interim order passed by the High Court with regard to the admission of respondents Nos. l and 2 in a Medical College. While respondent No. 1 was given admission on a wrong assumption with regard to his better position on account of, as stated by the learned counsel, an inadvertent mistake in wrong feeding of the computer, however, subsequently on discovery of the mistake the petitioner cancelled the admission. On challenge before the High Court this cancellation was withdrawn on the assumption that it was incompetent. But the Board constituted in this behalf, again passed an order of cancellation of admission of respondent No.1. In his place respondent No.2 was granted admission. By now respondent No.2, it appears, has studied for two years under the orders impugned before the High Court while it is not known as to what happened to respondent No.1. His learned A.O.R. has yet to seek instructions in this behalf. On filing of this petition the Court passed interim orders affecting the interim orders passed by the High Court with the result that, as stated by the learned counsel, while respondent No. 1 is out of college, respondent No.2 is regularly studying. In these circumstances it is just and fair in order to see whether justice has been done to both the respondents, we consider it a fit case for further examination. This petition, accordingly, is converted into appeal. The appeal shall be prepared on the present record with direction to the parties to file all those documents which would be necessary for disposal of appeal. It shall be fixed for hearing within this year at Lahore. The learned A.O.R. of the petitioners shall lay information before the Court with regard to the continuance or otherwise of studies by respondent No.1 during the period between 1987 and 1989. H.B.T./C‑48/S Leave granted.