2006 PLP 1550 (CLC)
MUHAMMAD AATIF BUTT — Petitioner Versus CHAIRMAN, ADMISSION BOARD/PRINCIPAL KING EDWARD MEDICAL COLLEGE, LAHORE and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2006 PLP 1550 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD AATIF BUTT — Petitioner Versus CHAIRMAN, ADMISSION BOARD/PRINCIPAL KING EDWARD MEDICAL COLLEGE, LAHORE and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2006 PLP 1550 (CLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2006 PLP 1550 (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 1550 (CLC) (MUHAMMAD AATIF BUTT — Petitioner Versus CHAIRMAN, ADMISSION BOARD/PRINCIPAL KING EDWARD MEDICAL COLLEGE, LAHORE and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Naveed Shabbir Goraya for Petitioner.
- 3. Mr. Fouzi Zafar, Assistant Advocate-General was directed to render assistance at this stage. He has submitted that the petitioner had adequate time to obtain Admission Packet. It was not necessary for him to personally visit the office of the Chairman, Admission Board. The last date for obtaining Admission Packet for the candidates, like the petitioner, was not extended. A serious dispute is being raised as to the genuineness and validity of the medical certificate. It is maintained that although the petitioner was advised bed rest from 5-8-2004 to 29-9-2004, yet according to the averments of the writ petition he visited the office of the Chairman Admission Board on 25-8-2004. It is also being disputed that the petitioner had approached the concerned authority on 25-8-2004. He has also explained the reason for extending the date for obtaining Admission Packets in the case of categories of the candidates referred in para.2.
Headnotes / Summary
Art. 199
Constitutional petition
Petitioner/candidate had contended that he could not obtain Admission Packet for test for admission in Medical College because during period in which said Admission Packet was to be obtained and submitted, he was suffering from typhoid fever and was advised bed rest
If petitioner was suffering from typhoid fever, he could arrange admission packet through somebody else
Even otherwise period of 20 days available for obtaining and submitting admission packet was sufficient
Cut-out date in such matters generally was mandatory
Said mandatory requirement having not been complied with, petition was dismissed.
Judgment & Decree
SYED JAMSHED ALI, J.
The last date for obtaining Admission Packet for the test for admission in any of the Medical Colleges of the Punjab was between 5-8-2004 up to 25-8-2004. The case of the petitioner is that from 5-8-2004 up to 29-8-2004, he has been suffering from typhoid fever and was advised bed rest. It is asserted that on 25-8-2004, he approached the office of the Chairman of the Admission Board for obtaining Admission Packet. It was refused with the plea that these had been exhausted and will be supplied and the date for submission of the documents for the purpose of entry test shall be extended.
2. It is contended that the Health Department of the Government of the Punjab extended the date for obtaining Admission Packet for those, who had not been able to obtain the domicile certificates and the candidate who had passed the "A" level examination or had a qualification from a foreign country up to 1-9-2004 but the date for obtaining Admission Packet for the general candidates was not extended. It is contended that even after 1-9-2004, the petitioner has been visiting the office of the Chairman of the Admission Board but Admission Packet was denied to him with the result that he will not be able to appear in the entry test.
3. Mr. Fouzi Zafar, Assistant Advocate-General was directed to render assistance at this stage. He has submitted that the petitioner had adequate time to obtain Admission Packet. It was not necessary for him to personally visit the office of the Chairman, Admission Board. The last date for obtaining Admission Packet for the candidates, like the petitioner, was not extended. A serious dispute is being raised as to the genuineness and validity of the medical certificate. It is maintained that although the petitioner was advised bed rest from 5-8-2004 to 29-9-2004, yet according to the averments of the writ petition he visited the office of the Chairman Admission Board on 25-8-2004. It is also being disputed that the petitioner had approached the concerned authority on 25-8-2004. He has also explained the reason for extending the date for obtaining Admission Packets in the case of categories of the candidates referred in para.2.
4. We have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties. We are not persuaded to interfere for the reasons that cut-out date in such matters is generally mandatory. Further, a number of seriously disputed questions of fact are involved. If the petitioner had been suffering from typhoid fever, he could arrange Admission Packet through somebody else. A period of 20 days available for obtaining Admission Packet which was otherwise sufficient. This petition is accordingly dismissed. H.B.T./M-319/L Petition dismissed.