2002 PLP 290 (MLD)

"A student pursuing Ph.D. Programme, except those admitted to Ph.D. Economics with effect from September, 1996 may be awarded the M. Phil Degree in the area of his specialization provided he fulfils the following conditions. Students admitted in Ph.D. Economics prior to September 1996 shall also be entitled to the award of M. Phil Degree: (i) Successfully completes all Ph. D. course work requirements with at least the minimum required Cumulative G.P.A. excepting the thesis. (ii) Successfully competes all the prescribed basis and preparatory course work, if any. (iii) Passes all the prescribed comprehensive examinations."

3. It was her case that her option was considered and accepted by the Examination Branch of the University, that is the respondent and as a consequence thereof, a Notification bearing No.1-38/2000 Exams-2582, dated 2-9-2000 (Annexure A) with the writ petition was issued. The notification pertaining to the result of comprehensive examination, dated 30-8-2000 (Annexure B) was also issued and lastly, she received a certificate from the Dean Faculty of Arabic, reflecting 23 courses which she had completed in addition to a compliment paid to her that she was a hardworking student and took keen interest in her study programme.

4. While she was expected to receive her Degree (M. Phil) this was withheld on the ground that she had not fulfilled the Hifz requirement for having the Degree.

5. Her case is that this was not a requirement which can be pressed in her case because she was never an M. Phil student from the beginning so as to attract the Hifz requirement. Whereas, she was a Ph.D. student and had taken an aberration while deciding to opt for M. Phil in the way and, therefore, the requirements for her were provided in section 9 of the Prospectus. Which is a special provision for such an eventuality.

6. That, therefore, Chapter VI of the Regualtions dealing with the Master of Philosophy Degree as reflected in the Prospectus for the year 1997-1998 would not be attracted. Because in paragraph 6 completion of Hifz as requirement is prescribed by the Academic Council of the University for completion of the programme and M. Phil Degree.

7. That she has completed all the requirements as envisaged by section 9(i) to (iii) and cannot be now asked to fulfil yet another requirement outside the scope of section 9.

8. It was argued by the University that being a M. Phil student, she had to fulfil this requirement. But learned counsel for the University was unable to advance any cogent argument in rebuttal to the effect whether a student covered by section 9 which is a special provision for a student opting for M. Phil while pursuing a Ph. D. Degree had also to fulfill the _Hifz requirement. Obviously, the case of the petitioner could not have been mixed up nor taken on similar basis as the case of a student enrolled for M. Phil Programme from the very start.

9. It appears that the University while issuing the Notification dated 2-9-2000 kept sight of this policy and declared the award of the Degree of M. Phil in Arabic to the petitioner and also issued a certificate that she attended 23 courses reflected in the certificate of June 8, 1999 issued by the Dean Faculty of Arabic (Annexure C). These arguments and the provisions of section 9 of the Prospectus for the year 1997-98 now estop the University in imposing any further condition ad a belated stage having accepted that she has fulfilled the requirement for the M. Phil and awarded a Degree.

10. It has been stated by learned counsel for the University that at the end of the notification, following words are written and which protect the University against any error, which are as under:-- "This result notification is issued as a notice only. Errors and omissions expected. Any entry appearing in it does not in itself confer any right or privilege independently to the grant of a proper Certificate/Degree which will be issued under the Regulations.

11. First of alt no prestigious University would issue such-like warnings on its notifications because it is expected that before the University issues a notification, all errors were found to be non existent. Even otherwise, an error as envisaged by such a note will be construed arithematical error and not an error of policy.

12. This Court further finds that there was no legal justification for the withholding of the Degree and the principle of locus poenitentiae can also not be pressed into service by the University Authorities after the issuance of the notification under reference and the other connected letters declaring her successful for awarding of M. Phil Degree. In this connection, reference may be made to Iqtadar Karamat Cheema v. The University of the Punjab through Vice- Chancellor, Lahore. and 4 others (2000 CLC 1589), Pakistan through the Secretary, Ministry of Finance v. Muhammad Himayatullah Farukhi (PLD 1969 SC 407), Chairman, Selection Committee/Principal, King Edward Medical College, Lahore and 2 others v. Wasif Zamir Ahmad and another (1997 SCMR 15) and Mrs. Kulsoom Ara v. The Controller of Examination, University of the Punjab Lahore (PLD 1995 Lahore 520).

13. The contentions raised by learned counsel for the petitioner are forceful and, therefore, the writ petition is accepted and the University is asked to award the Degree to the petitioner in terms of its own Notification of 2-9-2000. There will be no order as to costs. Q. M. H. /M. A. K. /A-367/ L Petition allowed.