CLC 2010

2010 PLP 1084 (CLC)

TALHA SIDDIQUE — Petitioner Versus DIRECTOR COMSATS and others — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
N/A
Honorable Judges
N/A
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2010 PLP 1084 (CLC)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members N/A
Parties TALHA SIDDIQUE — Petitioner Versus DIRECTOR COMSATS and others — Respondents
Primary Law Pakistan Engineering Council Regulations, 1985
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2010 PLP 1084 (CLC)?

This judgment primarily cites: Pakistan Engineering Council Regulations, 1985 as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2010 PLP 1084 (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: 2010 PLP 1084 (CLC) (TALHA SIDDIQUE — Petitioner Versus DIRECTOR COMSATS and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Pakistan Engineering Council Regulations, 1985

Representation

  • Mian Muhammad Aslam for Petitioner.
  • Mian Waheed Akhtar for Respondents.

Headnotes / Summary

R. 2(a)

Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199

Constitutional petition

Educational institution

Examination

Petitioner had passed first two semesters, but for 3rd and 4th semester, his C.P.G.A. being less than two, he failed to qualify both the semesters

Petitioner moved the authorities to permit him to repeat his 3rd and 4th semester which had been declined on the ground that as per amended Rule 2(a) of the Pakistan Engineering Council Regulations, 1985, re-admission could only be granted, if the candidate had 60 marks in his intermediate examination

Validity

Present case was not the one in which some fresh admission was being sought, from the very beginning in first semester to which said Rules should apply

Petitioner already being the student of the Institution wanted to repeat 3rd and 4th semesters

When there was no bar in the Pakistan Engineering Council Regulations, 1985 in that behalf, he must be permitted to do so

Petition was allowed.

Judgment & Decree

MIAN SAQIB NISAR, J.

The petitioner had obtained admission in Bachelor of Science in computer Engineering in the respondent' institution and had passed first two semesters; for 3rd and 4th semester, his CPGA was less than two, thus he failed to qualify both (the semesters); he has moved the respondents to permit him to repeat his 3rd and 4th semester, which has been declined on the ground that as per rule 2-a (as amended) of the Pakistan Engineering Council Regulations, 1985, re-admission can only be granted, if the candidate has 60 marks in his intermediate examinations.

2. When questioned learned counsel for the respondents states that this amendment has been brought on account of the directive of the Pakistan Engineering Council, which is competent authority for laying procedure down, the requisite qualification/criteria for the admission.

3. Heard. This is not the case, in which some fresh admission is being sought from the very beginning in first Semester to which the present rules should apply, rather the petitioner already being the student of the institution wants to repeat 3rd and 4th Semesters, therefore, when no bar in the Pakistan Engineering Council Regulations 1985, has been pointed out in this behalf, he must be permitted to do so.

4. In the light of above, by allowing this petition, the petitioner is allowed to repeat his 3rd and 4th Semester, obviously on the payment of all the requisite dues etc. H.B.T./T-42/L Petition allowed.