2009 PLP 1127 (CLC)

MAULVI ANWARUL HAQ, J.

Almost admitted facts of the case are that the petitioner, Principal of a College, sent admission forms of regular candidates for F.A/F.Sc. (Part-I) and (Part-II) for the said examination which was to be held on 23-4-2005. These forms were sent in two parcels. The admission fee for all the 555 students was deposited in the account of respondent No.1 on 3-2-2005 and 4-2-2005 vide receipts (Annexure "B"). One parcel was handed over to respondent No.4 (TCS) on 3-2-2005. This was for 336 students for Part-I while another parcel for 219 candidates for Part-II examination was so handed over on 4-2-2005. For reasons stated by respondent No.4 the parcels ultimately reached their destination on 8-2-2005. The petitioner was served with a notice on 15-2-2005 calling upon him to pay late fee of Rs.3,48,720 failing which the candidates would not be allowed to take the examination. The petitioner responded vide letter dated 22-2-2005 and sent a copy of the letter dated 15-2-2005 of TCS as well. However, the respondent No.1 insisted upon the payment of late fee.

2. This writ petition came up on 25-3-2005 when a report was called for. Vide order dated 7-4-2005 the respondent No.1 was directed to issue roll number slips to the said candidates. They did take the examination.

3. Raja Imran Aziz, Advocate/learned counsel for the petitioner contends with reference to Rule 2.16 of the Calendar of the respondent Board that the documents having been placed in the course of ' transmission in due time and the fee having been deposited within the prescribed period of time, the respondent No.1 has no lawful authority to claim the said late fee. Hafiz Hafiz-ur-Rehman, Advocate/learned counsel for the respondent No.1, on the other hand, is of the view that the last date being 7-2-2005 and the parcels having reached the Board office on 8-2-2005, the claim of his client for payment of late fee is lawful.

4. I have gone through this file, with the assistance of the learned counsel for the parties. As stated by me above, there is no denial that the parcels were handed over to TCS for transmission to respondent No.1 on 3-2-2005 and 4-2-2005. There is also no denial that the requisite fee had been deposited in the account of the respondent Board on 3-2-2005 and 4-2-2005. There is, of course, no dispute that the parcels were handed over to TCS respectively on 3-2-2005 and 4-2-2005. However, according to the TCS, these could not be delivered before 8-2-2005 as according to their written statement the office was found closed.

5. In the light of the said admitted facts I may reproduce hereunder the relevant Rule 2.16:-- "Except as otherwise provided in the Rules, the admission forms and fees of all the candidates should reach the office of the Board together on or before the date fixed by the Chairman. If the admission form is sent by registered post after paying the admission fee to the Board's account or sending it by money order at least 3 days before the date prescribed for submission of admission forms with or without late fee, the admission form and fee shall be considered to have been received in time provided it is received in the office of the Board not later than ten days after the last date for submission of admission forms. If the admission form and fee of a candidate is received by registered post within five days after the last date fixed for submission of admission forms without the late fee, no late fee shall be charged." Upon a plain reading of the said Rule, it will be seen that the fee having been deposited three days before the said last date i.e. 7-2-2005 and the parcels having been received within 10 days from the said last date i.e. on 8-2-2005, it will be deemed that the documents have been received in time. This being so, the claim of the respondent for the late fee is not tenable and is without lawful authority. The writ petition accordingly is allowed and the impugned claim of the respondent Board for payment of late fee of Rs.3,48,320 is declared to be without lawful authority and void. The said examination had already been taken by the concerned students, their results shall be announced immediately. No orders as to costs. H.B.T./P-25/L Petition allowed.