1995 PLP 652 (CLC)
JAVED MAHMOOD‑‑‑Petitioner Versus PRINCIPAL, ISLAMIA COLLEGE, CIVIL LINES,
| Citation | 1995 PLP 652 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Munir A. Sheikh, J |
| Parties | JAVED MAHMOOD‑‑‑Petitioner Versus PRINCIPAL, ISLAMIA COLLEGE, CIVIL LINES, |
| Primary Law | Educational institution‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1995 PLP 652 (CLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: Educational institution‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1995 PLP 652 (CLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Munir A. Sheikh, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1995 PLP 652 (CLC) (JAVED MAHMOOD‑‑‑Petitioner Versus PRINCIPAL, ISLAMIA COLLEGE, CIVIL LINES,). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Atir Mahmood for Petitioner.
- Prof. Zamir Hussain Naqvi, Assistant Professor for Respondent.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑Admission‑‑‑Relaxation of age‑‑‑Director, Education who was empowered to allow relaxation in age to candidate up to eight years, granted relaxation in age limit up to the extent of seven years to the candidate, but Principal of College concerned declined to give admission to him despite such relaxation on the ground that according to policy recommendation/report from him should have been called for by Director, Education before passing order regarding relaxation of age‑‑‑Principal of College was empowered to give relaxation up to five years, while Director, Education was empowered up to eight years‑‑ Principal or Director, Education, if wanted to give relaxation within thbir respective permissible limits were not required to send for report or comments from each other‑‑‑Candidate having been granted relaxation in age by Director, Education within permissible limits, was entitled to get admission in college‑‑‑Act of Principal declining to give admission to candidate was declared illegal by High Court. Date of_ hearing: 26th April, 1994.
Judgment & Decree
LAHORE‑‑‑Respondent Writ Petition No. 15523 of 1993, heard on 26th April, 1994. ‑‑‑‑Admission‑‑‑Relaxation of age‑‑‑Director, Education who was empowered to allow relaxation in age to candidate up to eight years, granted relaxation in age limit up to the extent of seven years to the candidate, but Principal of College concerned declined to give admission to him despite such relaxation on the ground that according to policy recommendation/report from him should have been called for by Director, Education before passing order regarding relaxation of age‑‑‑Principal of College was empowered to give relaxation up to five years, while Director, Education was empowered up to eight years‑‑ Principal or Director, Education, if wanted to give relaxation within thbir respective permissible limits were not required to send for report or comments from each other‑‑‑Candidate having been granted relaxation in age by Director, Education within permissible limits, was entitled to get admission in college‑‑‑Act of Principal declining to give admission to candidate was declared illegal by High Court. Atir Mahmood for Petitioner. Prof. Zamir Hussain Naqvi, Assistant Professor for Respondent. Date of_ hearing: 26th April, 1994.