2010 PLP 961 (CLC)
Syed ZEESHAN AZIZ — Petitioner Versus BAHAUDIN ZAKRIYA UNIVERSITY, MULTAN through Vice-Chancellor and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2010 PLP 961 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | Syed ZEESHAN AZIZ — Petitioner Versus BAHAUDIN ZAKRIYA UNIVERSITY, MULTAN through Vice-Chancellor and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | (a) Administration of justice, (c) Constitution of Pakistan (1973), (b) Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2010 PLP 961 (CLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: (a) Administration of justice, (c) Constitution of Pakistan (1973), (b) Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2010 PLP 961 (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 961 (CLC) (Syed ZEESHAN AZIZ — Petitioner Versus BAHAUDIN ZAKRIYA UNIVERSITY, MULTAN through Vice-Chancellor and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Mehmood Ashraf Khan for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
Two wrongs cannot make one right, that too, enforceable under the law.
Art. 199
Constitutional petition
Rules and regulations of university
Scope
Rules and regulations of the University could not be deviated.
Art. 199
Constitutional petition
Petitioner, a student of the university was not allowed to appear in the 3rd and 4th Semester of master of computer science degree
Petitioner asserted that due to discriminatory act and conduct of the university authorities, the petitioner's career was at stake
Record revealed that petitioner had been detained as he failed in the last subject
Petitioner's request for redressal of his grievance was turned down by authorities of the university but no copy of the said order had been attached with the constitutional petition which could determine as to whether the order passed by authorities was legal or illegal
No malice had been attributed to the authorities in the constitutional petition--Constitutional petition was dismissed in limine.
Judgment & Decree
SYED AKHLAQ AHMAD, J.
Through this writ petition, the petitioner has sought direction to the respondents to allow him to appear in the 3rd and 4th Semester which is going to be held on 8-3-2010.
2. The contents of writ petition show that the petitioner is studying in the computerized master of computer science (MCS) in Bahaduddin Zakaria University Multan. He got admission in the university through Roll No.8-50 in the year 2008 and successfully completed his initial two semesters. He has been detained in 3rd Semester through the result sheet stating that he is not entitled to appear in the 4th Semester. He has been directed by the respondents to again appear in 3rd Semester to qualify for the 4th Semester.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is entitled for the same treatment which has been extended to Amjad Naseer Roll No.7-15 and Bilal Ahmad Roll No.7-24 (MCS-Evening). Due to discriminatory act and conduct of the respondents, the petitioner's career is at stake.
4. According to Annexure `A', the Semester result (MCS Morning) of Zeeshan Aziz petitioner is as under:
Roll No. Name 301 302 303 304 305 306 GPA POG PA CGPA Remarks MCS 08.50 Zeeshan Aziz 2.00 2.10 2.00 2.20 2.00 Fail 1.72 1.93 Detained
5. It is evident from above that the petitioner has been detained as he failed in the last subject
306. Writ petition is silent on the point if the petitioner applied to the competent authorities of the University for redressal of his grievance. However, learned counsel for the petitioner informed the Court that the petitioner did undertake the said exercise but the same has been turned down by the authorities of the University on 3-3-2010. No copy of the said order has been attached with the petition. In the absence of which it cannot be determined if the order passed by the authorities of the University was legal or illegal. No malice has been attributed to the respondents in the petition. It is well settled that two wrongs cannot make one right, that too, enforceable under the law. Rules and regulations of the University cannot be deviated. Writ petition is therefore, dismissed in limine. M.U.Y./Z-13/L Petition dismissed.