CLC 2006

2006 PLP 809 (CLC)

BILAL HUSSAIN — Appellant Versus BAHAUDDIN ZAKARIYA UNIVERSITY, MULTAN through Vice-Chancellor and 2 others — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
2005-October-5
Honorable Judges
N/A
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2006 PLP 809 (CLC)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members N/A
Parties BILAL HUSSAIN — Appellant Versus BAHAUDDIN ZAKARIYA UNIVERSITY, MULTAN through Vice-Chancellor and 2 others — Respondents
Primary Law Bahauddin Zakariya University Act (III of 1975)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2006 PLP 809 (CLC)?

This judgment primarily cites: Bahauddin Zakariya University Act (III of 1975) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2006 PLP 809 (CLC)?

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 809 (CLC) (BILAL HUSSAIN — Appellant Versus BAHAUDDIN ZAKARIYA UNIVERSITY, MULTAN through Vice-Chancellor and 2 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Bahauddin Zakariya University Act (III of 1975)

Headnotes / Summary

S. 11-A

Revision was competent before Chancellor of University under S.11-A of Bahauddin Zakariya University Act, 1975 against decision of University's Syndicate.

Judgment & Decree

This I.C.A. proceeds against judgment dated 30-8-2005, passed by learned Single Judge in Chamber of this Court, whereby Writ Petition No.4903 of 2005, filed by the appellant has been dismissed.

2. Learned counsel has tried to argue that the relevant rules and regulations have not been properly interpreted in the impugned judgment in the light of attending circumstances of the case. We have examined the records of the said writ petition and we are afraid no case .for interference stands made out. However, we find that on an earlier occasion the appellant was referred to the University Syndicate who passed an order leading to the filing of the said writ petition. We have examined the provisions of Bahauddin Zarkria University Act, 1975 and find that against the said decision, a revision is competent before the Chancellor of the University, under section 11-A of the said Act.

3. If so advised, the petitioner may file a revision before the Chancellor of the said University. With these observations the I.C.A. is disposed of. H.B.T./B-111/L Order accordingly