P L D 1980 Karachi 490 (PLP)

TANZILUR REHMAN, J.-This judgment will dispose of two connected Petitions Nos. 2027 of 1979 and 220 of 1980 as the impugned order in both the petitions is he same.

2. The petitioners in these petitions have challenged. the order dated 21-11-1979 passed by the respondent expelling the petitioners, among several other students, from the University for a period of 3 years allegelly for their extreme misconduct, severe breach of discipline and illegal activities, as it was alleged that the petitioners being associated with the Jiayi Sind Students' Federation and acting as a tool of some disgruntled members of the teaching staff of the Sind University, frequently disturbed classes, compelled students to stage boycot, raised subversive slogans, distributed anti-Pakistani literature including a cyclostyled pamphlet entitled "Pakistan not wanted" and committed various other activities which vitiated the academic life on the Campus.

3. The sole contention on which this order has been assailed before us is that the order violates the principle of natural justice inasmuch as no show-cause notice was issued to the petitioners nor they were afforded any opportunity of being heard before the impugned order was passed.

4. Mr. Nooruddin Sarki, the learned counsel for the petitioners, relied upon a number of authorities, namely University of Dacca v. Zaki Ahmed (1), Abdus Saboor Khan v. Karachi University (2) and Averready Pictures Ltd. v. Government of Pakistan (3). In the first case it was held by the Supreme Court:- "that in all proceedings by whomsoever held, whether judicial or administrative, the principles of natural justice have to be observed if the proceedings might result in consequences affecting the person or property or other right of the parties concerned." This rule applies even though there may be no positive words in the statute or legal document whereby the power is vested to take such proceedings, for, in such cases this requirement is to be implied into it as the minimum requirement of fairness:' In the other case it was`: again observed by the Supreme Court that "No one can be condemned unheard, is one of settled principles of law, and such a principle will be read into relevant law, unless its application is excluded by express words. A duty is cast on every administrative Tribunal to act fairly and justly and with due regard to the principle of natural justice, unless specifically exempted from such a limitation. Mere omission from the relevant law, of a provision for notice, would not affect this proposition. Reference in this connection my be made to the cases, Chief Commissioner, Karachi v. Mrs Dina Sohrab Katrak P L D 1959 S C (Pak.) 45, Messrs Faridsons Ltd. v. The Government ofPakistan and another P L D 1961 S C 537 and Abdur.Rehman v. Collector and Deputy Commissioner, Bahawalnagar P L D 1964 S C 461 (1) P L D 1965 S-C. 90 (2) P L- D 1966 S- C 36 (3) .P.LD-1979Kar..155

5. Following the above authorities, which are binding on us, we hold that the rule `audi alteram partem', that no one should be condemned unheard is to be read into relevant law unless its application is expressly excluded by that law. In this case the petitioners being students at the Sind University were deprived of not only pursuing their studies at the said University but also from seeking admission in any class in future for a period of 3 years without a show-cause notice being issued to them before inflicting the said disqualification or penalty upon them. We therefore hold that the principles of natural justice have been violated and the petitioners have been condemned unheard and thus the order of rustication without lawful authority.

6. In the result, we allow these -petitions, but, in the circumstances,, the parties are left to bear their own costs.

7. Since these petitions succeed on a technical ground, we would like to observe that this judgment will not prevent the authorities of the Sind University from taking necessary action on the basis of the allege misconduct, breach of discipline and illegal activities against t h petitioners, in accordance with law and after issuing notice to them so a to afford them an opportunity of being heard in the matter. K. M. A. Petitions succeeded.