2005 PLP 737 (YLR)
RAMIZA TAHIR‑‑‑Petitioner Versus UNIVERSITY OF PUNJAB through Vice‑Chairman and 2 others‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 2005 PLP 737 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Ch. Ijaz Ahmad, J |
| Parties | RAMIZA TAHIR‑‑‑Petitioner Versus UNIVERSITY OF PUNJAB through Vice‑Chairman and 2 others‑‑‑Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2005 PLP 737 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2005 PLP 737 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Ch. Ijaz Ahmad, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2005 PLP 737 (YLR) (RAMIZA TAHIR‑‑‑Petitioner Versus UNIVERSITY OF PUNJAB through Vice‑Chairman and 2 others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Taki Ahmad Khan for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
(a) Interpretation of statutes‑‑‑ ‑‑‑‑ Special regulation excludes the general regulation. Zia‑ur‑Rehman's case PLD 1973 SC 49 and Mian Nawaz Sharif's case PLD 1993 SC 473 rel. (b) Educational institution‑‑ ‑‑‑‑ Gold medal, entitlement of‑‑‑Petitioner was student of B.Sc. (Honours) and she had passed all the semesters with distinction‑‑ Gold medal was not awarded to the petitioner for the reason that in 2nd semester, she could not appear in two papers on the ground of her illness and passed the same in special examination arranged by University Authorities‑‑‑Plea raised by the petitioner was that as she had secured highest marks in all semesters, therefore, it was her right to be awarded with gold medal‑‑‑Validity‑‑‑Specific condition prescribed by special regulation was that the petitioner must have passed alt examinations of the concerned course in first attempt‑‑‑Petitioner failed to fulfil the specific condition laid down in the special regulation of the University‑‑‑For the purpose of maintaining Constitutional petition, it was the duty and obligation of the petitioner to show that the action of the authorities was in derogation of the rules and regulations‑‑‑Petitioner failed to bring her case within the parameters of the regulations of University, therefore, Constitutional petition was not maintainable‑‑‑Petition was dismissed in circumstances, Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.
199. Ali Mir's case 1984 SCMR 433 rel. (c) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑ ‑‑‑‑Art. 199‑‑‑Constitutional petition‑‑ Maintainability‑‑‑For the purpose of maintaining Constitutional petition, it was the duty and obligation of the petitioner to show that the action of the authorities was in derogation of the rules and regulations. Ali Mir's case 1984 SCMR 433 rel. Miss Shazia Khalil for the University.
Judgment & Decree
Ifraa Hafeez 146
3. Zol‑3 Sana Sikandar 168.25
4. Zol‑4 Javeria Rafiq 168
5. Z01‑5 Hafiz Abdullah Shakir 145.5
6. Zol‑5 Khaula Ahmed 155
7. Zol‑7 Shaukat Ali 157.25
8. Zol‑8 Asif Ali 154
9. Z01‑9 Hufsa Jamshaid 152.5
10. Zol‑10 Romeeza Tahir 140.75 F.Sc. 1/5 B.Sc. (Hons) 1/6 Hfiz Quran NCC Aggregate 148.8 79.13 20 421.43 157.4 77.90 20 401.3 147.8 76.81 392.86 146.4 78.11 392.51 148.6 68.23 20 382.33 156 71.02 382.02 141 71.92 370.17 147 66.26 367.26 135.2 76.44 364.14 135.4 80.04 356.19 M. A. /M.Sc. (lions. Semester Studies (v) For the award of Gold Medal or some other award the Ist position will be calculated on OPM (Overall Percentage Marks) basis of the whole course of M.A./M.Sc. (lions.) degree. (vi) For the award of Gold Medal, role of honours and all other distinctions of Punjab University, a student must have passed all the examinations of the concerned course in first attempt. In case the aforesaid facts are put in a juxta position then it is crystal clear that the petitioner has not passed Semester‑II in one attempt coupled with the fact that the competent authority has framed special regulation for grant of gold medal. It is settled principle of law that special regulation excludes the general regulation as per law laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court in the following judgments:‑‑ Zia‑ur‑Rehman's case (PLD 1973 SC 49) Mian Nawaz Sharif's case (PLD 1993 SC 473) As the special regulation prescribes specific condition that the petitioner must have passed all the examinations of the concerned course in first attempt. The petitioner fails to fulfil the specific condition laid down in the special regulation mentioned above. It is settled principle of law that for the purpose of maintaining the Constitution petition, it is the duty and obligation of the petitioner to show that the action of the respondents is in derogation of the rules and regulations of the respondents. The petitioner fails to bring her case within the parameters of the regulations of the respondents, therefore, Constitutional petition is not maintainable as per law laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court in Ali Mir's case (1984 SCMR 433). In view of what has been discussed above, I do not find any merit in this petition, therefore, writ petition is dismissed. M.H./R‑105/L Petition dismissed.