1999 PLP 1583 (SCMR)

IRSHAD HASAN KHAN, J.

This petition is directed against the judgment dated 12-8-1996 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore passed in Writ Petition No. 17280 of 1095.

2. The brief facts are that respondent No. 1 appeared in the Intermediate (Higher S6condary School) Examination held in the month of April, 1994 under the Roll No.29529. While he was taking his paper of Math 'B' he was detected possessing objectionable handwritten paper, relevant to the subject-paper of the date, by the Deputy Superintendent of the Centre. He was charge-sheeted and disqualified by the Disciplinary Committee and his appeal/revision was also dismissed by the Board. Being aggrieved, he filed Writ Petition No.4976 of 1995 which was accepted and the case was remanded for re-hearing after providing the opportunity of being heard to the respondent by the Disciplinary Committee. On remand, Disciplinary Committee, after cross-examining the respondent again disqualified him. In consequence, the respondent again filed a Constitution Petition before the High Court which was accepted through the impugned order declaring the order dated 26-10-1995 passed by the Disciplinary Committee as being without lawful authority and of no, legal effect. The petitioners herein were also directed to declare the result of the respondent in accordance with law. It may also be noted that during the pendency of the petition, the learned Judge in Chamber, also summoned the Professor, of Mathematics from the Government College, Lahore to test the respondent's knowledge in the Mathematics. After examining the respondent in the presence of the learned counsel for the parties, it was found that respondent did possess basic knowledge of Mathematics and could solve the questions which were put to him in the examination. It was further observed by the learned Judge in Chambers that order dated 26-10-1995 was passed by the Disciplinary Committee not on the basis of the charge-sheet and the proof of those charges, but on the basis of cross-examination of the respondent to test his ability to solve the question paper after six months.

4. Be that as it may, we find that the period of disqualification has since expired, petition for leave to appeal against the order of the High Court would be of an academic interest only and, thus, the case is not fit for granting leave. The same course was adopted by the Board in the case of Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education and others v. Muhammad Tariq (1990 SCMR 746). We are also informed that during the interregnum the respondent has also passed his B.A. Examination. This is another circumstance. for declining leave. We may, however, add that we are unable to approve the course adopted by the learned Single Judge in summoning the Professor of Mathematics from the Government College, Lahore to- test the respondent's knowledge in Mathematics. This was sole function of the relevant Board of Authority and the High Court had no jurisdiction to interfere in this matter.

5. With these observations, this petition is dismissed and leave is declined. H.B.T./B-23/S ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Petition dismissed.