2006 PLP 989 (MLD)
RAZIA BIBI — Petitioner Versus CONTROLLER (EXAMINATION) BAHAUDDIN ZAKARIYA UNIVERSITY, MULTAN and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2006 PLP 989 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | RAZIA BIBI — Petitioner Versus CONTROLLER (EXAMINATION) BAHAUDDIN ZAKARIYA UNIVERSITY, MULTAN and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Educational institution |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2006 PLP 989 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Educational institution as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2006 PLP 989 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2006 PLP 989 (MLD) (RAZIA BIBI — Petitioner Versus CONTROLLER (EXAMINATION) BAHAUDDIN ZAKARIYA UNIVERSITY, MULTAN and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Nadeem Ahmad Tarrar for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
Grievance, rather apprehension of petitioner was that for no fault on her part she would lose her last chance to clear her English Paper B.Ed.
Petitioner had filed her forms and requisite charges in time, but letter containing Roll number and date-sheet sent by the University Authorities to her was delivered by Postal Authorities to petitioner after 11 days from putting it in postal process
University Authority itself had lodged a protest with Postal Department on its said negligence
Apprehension of petitioner, appeared to be misplaced, because neither petitioner nor University Authorities were to be blamed
Petitioner, for said misdeeds of postal Authorities, by no stretch of imagination, could be said to have lost her chance to clear said English Paper of B.Ed.
Petitioner, subject to deposit of charges and reserving her right to proceed against concerned responsible person, could appear in the said paper.
Judgment & Decree
MAULVI ANWARUL HAQ, J.
States at the bar that real grievance rather apprehension of the petitioner is that for no fault of her's she may have lost her last chance to clear her English Paper of B.Ed. An examination of the writ petition and the accompanying documents reveals that the petitioner had filed her forms and the requisite charges in time. According to the letter dated 24-2-2005 of the respondent-University her roll number and date sheet were put in the postal process on 28-1-2005 but the postal authorities delivered the letter to the petitioner on 8-2-2005. I further find that the respondent-University itself has lodged a protest with the postal Department on its said negligence. In the said state of affairs apparent on the face of the records, apprehension of the learned counsel appears to be rather misplaced. It is but evident that neither the petitioner nor the University is to be blamed but at the same time for the misdeeds of the postal authorities the petitioner by no stretch of imagination can be said to have lost her last chance to clear the said English Paper of B.Ed. The only dispute left is with regard to the fee which, according to the University, is not refundable. This will be a subject-matter of some appropriate proceedings. The petitioner may, therefore, subject to deposit of charges and reserving her right to proceed against the concerned responsible person, appear in the said English Paper. With these observations, writ petition is disposed of. Copy of this order to be remitted to the respondent-University immediately, by the office. H.B.T./R-150/L Order accordingly.