CLC 2006

2006 PLP 850 (CLC)

Mst. QURRAT-UL-AIN — Petitioner Versus SECRETARY EDUCATION, LAHORE and 3 others — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
2005-July-4
Honorable Judges
N/A
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2006 PLP 850 (CLC)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members N/A
Parties Mst. QURRAT-UL-AIN — Petitioner Versus SECRETARY EDUCATION, LAHORE and 3 others — Respondents
Primary Law Educational Institution
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2006 PLP 850 (CLC)?

This judgment primarily cites: Educational Institution as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2006 PLP 850 (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 850 (CLC) (Mst. QURRAT-UL-AIN — Petitioner Versus SECRETARY EDUCATION, LAHORE and 3 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Educational Institution

Representation

  • Ijaz Ahmad Toor for Petitioner.
  • Haji Muhammad Aslam Malik for Respondents.

Headnotes / Summary

Examination

Petitioner/candidate, who appeared in Intermediate Part-I Examination of Session 2002, had failed in two subjects in which he was given compartment

Petitioner then applied for Intermediate Part-I and II examination 2004 with nominal examination fee and she appeared in examination with full subjects of both parts of Intermediate without any objection by the Examination Authorities

Result card was not issued to petitioner, despite according to her information, she had passed examination in full

Stand of Authorities was that since petitioner failed to appear in two papers of compartment of Part-I and all subjects of Part-II in Session 2003, she was declared failed in examination as a whole and she was required to appear in all subjects of both parts of Intermediate examination in Session 2004, but she only appeared in one paper of Part-I along with all subjects of Part-II through concealment of fact and that was why result card could not be issued to her

Validity

Rule 25 of Rules Regarding Part-I and Part-II (Part System) Examination at Intermediate Level, issued by Notification dated 29-12-1997, had provided that two chances had to be given to candidate to clear subjects of compartment

Petitioner, in circumstances could appear in two coming examinations to clear said papers

If petitioner did. not appear in Session 2003 to clear said papers of compartment with papers of Part-II, it could not be said that petitioner had lost her second chance as well to clear said papers of compartment, which she had availed in Session 2004 and it could not be said that petitioner having not appeared in said papers in Session 2003, had failed as a whole

High Court accepting constitutional petition directed the Authorities to issue Result Card for Intermediate Examination Session 2004 in favour of petitioner.

Judgment & Decree

IJAZ AHMAD CHAUDHRY, J.

Through this petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 the petitioner has sought issuance of direction to the respondents for releasing her result card regarding Intermediate Examination Session 2004 under Roll No.28938.

2. Briefly the facts as narrated in the writ petition are that in Intermediate Part-I Examination of Session 2002-A vide Roll No.62950 the petitioner failed in Economics Paper only, who then applied for the Intermediate Part-I and II Examination Session 2004 with nominal examination fees and she was issued Roll No.28938. Then she appeared in the examination with full subjects of both parts of Intermediate without any objection by the Examination Authorities, but result card of the petitioner is not being issued in spite of that according to her information she has passed the examination in full.

3. The respondents have filed parawise comments to the effect that after failing in Session 2002, the petitioner submitted admission form (copy enclosed with the comments) for appearance in Economics Part-I and Computer Sciences of Part-I and all the subjects/papers of Part-II in .the Intermediate Annual Examination, 2003, but she did not appear in any of the papers and failed in the examination as a whole, who could appear in both the parts in the next examination. However, she got issued Roll Number for Session 2004 through concealment while mentioning the Roll Number 62950 allocated to her for Session 2002 alleging it for Session 2002. It is further submitted that in the Session 2004, she was required to appear in all papers/subjects of both Parts-I and II of Intermediate, but she only appeared in the subject of Economics Part-I along with all papers of Part-II illegally and her result card has rightly been detained due to her ineligibility.

4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents attached with the writ petition as well as the comments submitted by the respondents and the Rules Regarding Part-I and Part-II (Part System) Examination. At Intermediate Level issued vide Notification dated 29-12-1997. The stand of the respondents is that since the petitioner failed to appear in the papers of Compartment of Part-I and all subjects of Part-II in Session 2003, she was declared failed in the examination as a whole and she was required to appear in all the subjects of both Parts of Intermediate Examination in the Session 2004, but she only appeared in the paper of Economics Part-I along with all subjects of Part-II through concealment of fact, hence the result card cannot be issued to her.

5. It is admitted position that in the Intermediate Examination Part-I Session 2002 the petitioner appeared as a regular candidate and she was given compartment in two subjects. Rule 25 (ibid) provides that two chances have to be given to the candidate to clear the subjects of compartment. Hence the petitioner could appear in the two coming examinations to clear the said papers. If she did not appear in the Sessions 2003 to clear the same along with the papers of Part-II, it cannot be said that she had lost her second chance as well to clear the said papers of compartment, which she has availed in the Session 2004. I am not in agreement with the learned counsel for the respondents that the petitioner having not appeared in the said papers in Session 2003 had failed as a whole vide Rule 25 (ibid) as the Examination is being taken in parts. The irregularities pointed out by the respondents in the entries of admission form regarding Roll Number and Session are not sufficient to infringe the right of the petitioner to avail two chances to clear the papers of compartment as those, on pointation, could be got cured at the relevant time.

6. For the foregoing reasons, this writ petition is accepted and the respondents are directed to issue Result Card for the Intermediate Examination Session 2004 in favour of the petitioner. H.B.T./Q-24/L Petition accepted