2004 PLP 1399 (CLC)
Syed WAQAS NOOR BUKHARI through his father — Petitioner Versus BAHAUDDIN ZAKARIYA'UNIVERSITY. MULTAN through Vice-Chancellor and 6 others — Respondents
| Citation | 2004 PLP 1399 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | Syed WAQAS NOOR BUKHARI through his father — Petitioner Versus BAHAUDDIN ZAKARIYA'UNIVERSITY. MULTAN through Vice-Chancellor and 6 others — Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2004 PLP 1399 (CLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2004 PLP 1399 (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: 2004 PLP 1399 (CLC) (Syed WAQAS NOOR BUKHARI through his father — Petitioner Versus BAHAUDDIN ZAKARIYA'UNIVERSITY. MULTAN through Vice-Chancellor and 6 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Muhammad Irfan Wyne for Petitioner.
- Muhammad Tariq Rajwana for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
Art. 199
Constitutional petition
Second Constitutional petition on the same subject
Admission in university on basis of Self-Finance Scheme
Candidate who failed to get admission en University on Self-Finance Scheme, approached the office for refunding his advanced amount whereupon candidate was asked by concerned Authorities that if he would not insist to refund back said amount, he alongwith other five candidates would be accommodated by way of exercising discretion of, Vice-Chancellor
University accommodated rest of five candidates except the candidate despite his name was placed at the top of said five candidates
Constitutional petition filed by candidate against decision of University was dismissed on ground that he had not availed the remedy of appeal before Admission Appellate Committee-- Intra-Court appeal filed by the candidate was disposed of as withdrawn and thereafter he filed appeal before Admission Appellate Committee Which was dismissed and candidate had filed Constitutional petition-- Record had revealed that Appellate Admission Committee of University in its meeting had considered the case of candidate
No irregularity was found in the admission process and all the admissions were granted strictly on merits and according to policy of University and thus, it was ultimately found that claim of candidate was invalid
Present Constitutional petition otherwise was hit by principle of res judicata as earlier Constitutional petition filed by candidate was dismissed and dismissal order was challenged by candidate in Infra-Court Appeal which was disposed of as same was withdrawn and was not pressed
Second Constitutional petition on same subject was not maintainable.
Judgment & Decree
Muhammad Tariq Rajwana for Respondents. Date of hearing: 8th April, 2004. Through this Constitutional petition filed under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of. Pakistan, 1973, the petitioner has sought for setting aside the impugned order, dated 28-1-2004 passed by the Appellate Admission Committee of Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner for admission on the basis of Self-Finance Scheme was rejected.
2. Brief facts to the case giving rise to this Constitutional petition are that the petitioner applied for admission in Electrical Department of Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan on the basis of Self-Finance Scheme. Subsequently the petitioner participated in the entry test and when did not find his name in the merit lists, he approached to the office for refunding of his advanced amount of Rs.2,50,000 whereupon he was asked by the concerned authorities that if he will not insist to refund, back his amount, he alongwith other five candidates will be accommodated by way of-exercising the discretion of Vice-Chancellor. The name of the petitioner was placed at the top of that five candidates. Consequently the University accommodated rest of five candidate except the, petitioner whereupon the petitioner filed a Writ Petition No.4736 of 2003 before this Court which was dismissed on 11-12-2003 with the observation that the petitioner has not availed of the remedy of appeal before the Admission Appellate Committee, therefore, the writ petition is not maintainable, whereupon the petitioner preferred Infra-Court appeal which was also withdrawn as having been not pressed. Consequently, the appellant filed an appeal before the Admission Appellate Committee which was dismissed on 28-1-2004, hence the instant petition.
3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the impugned order is against law; that the decision of Appellate Admission Committee is illegal, unjust ultra vires and is liable to be set aside.
4. On the contrary learned counsel for the respondents strongly repelled the contentions of the leaned counsel for the petitioner contending that the instant petition is hit by the principle of resjudicata, therefore, the same merits dismissal.
5. Arguments heard. Record perused.
6. Record reveals that the Appellate Admission Committee of the University in its meeting considered the case of the petitioner but no irregularity was found in the admission process and all the admissions were granted strictly on merit and according to the policy of the University and ultimately found the claim of the petition as invalid. Moreover, as contended by the learned counsel for-the respondents the instant petition is hit by the principle of resjudicata as earlier writ petition filed by the petitioner was dismissed by this Court vide order, dated 11-12-2003 which was challenged by the 1petitioner in ICA which was also disposed of as having been not pressed, therefore,, the second writ petition on the same subject is not maintainable.
7. For what has been discussed above, I am not inclined to allow this petition which is hereby dismissed. H.B.T./W-13/L Petition dismissed.