Impairing performance

2015 CLC 65 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

Art. 199Constitutional petitionEducational institutionMistake by authoritiesFactual controversyImpairing performanceAdmission to medical collegeEntrance test

Petitioner was candidate for admission to medical college and due to mistake of authorities incorrect examination center was mentioned in admission card and on the day of examination petitioner had to rush to proper examination center

Plea raised by petitioner was that if he had directly been intimated about proper center well in time before the date of Enterance Test his performance would have not been impaired

Contention of authorities was that university acted promptly on the date of Entrance Test and also allowed petitioner to take Entrance Test at correct examination center, even though he arrived there after cut off time

Validity

Controversy started at the point as to when the university was aware of the mistake, and if mistake was discovered well before date of entrance test then why it did not directly communicate to petitioner in view of the fact that his contact numbers and email address were available with the university

Questions that as to whether petitioner checked the newspapers or university's website to confirm the location of his examination center; whether the petitioner reached the examination center before and not after 9 a.m. (fixed time) on the date of Entrance Test; and that at what time correct information was communicated to petitioner were disputed questions of fact resolution whereof was not normally undertaken by High Court in exercise of Constitutional jurisdiction

University had decided to form a three member committee to probe into the matter so as to take steps to avoid such mistakes in future

No relief was decided to be given to petitioner by quoting prospectus but fact remained that university committed a mistake even though it could be taken to be an honest mistake albeit it had not been so pleaded

High Court, while using paternal jurisdiction referred the matter to Vice-Chancellor/Admission Board of the university for further consideration

Petition was disposed of accordingly.