Unfair means at examination
Unfair means at examination legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.
Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)
Unfair means at examination-Contended that petitioner rot given opportunity of hearing inasmuch as neither reports forming basis of initiation of proceedings nor material forming foundation of such reports supplied to him-No grievance on such account, however, made before authorities-Material giving rise to proceedings in fact petitioner's own answer books which petitioner did not disown Petitioner also heard firstly by Disciplinary Committee and then by Appellate Authority-Factual and circumstantial aspects of case having been duly considered by High Court no exception, held, could be taken to decision of High Court not interfering with finding of fact arrived at by Departmental Authorities-Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185 (3).
"Unfair means at examination", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/15093
Precedents & Case Laws citing "Unfair means at examination"
P L D 1981 Lahore 244
ZAFARULLAH‑Petitioner Versus BOARD OF INTERMEDIATE AND SECONDARY
Court: Art. 199‑Writ petition, maintainability of‑Student petitioner's case finding him guilty of adopting unfair means at examination under consideration on appeal before Appellate Committee‑Writ petition against order holding him guilty nevertheless, held, maintain able.‑Educational Institutions.1981 S C M R 364
SHAUKAT ALI-Appellant Versus THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS, UNIVERSITY OF
Court: --- Vol. I, Reglns. 13 & 18 (3)-Disciplinary proceedings-Use of unfair means at examination-Natural justice, principles of Persons in charge of educational institutions-To be given fullest authority vis-a -vis their students in same runner as parent or guardian-Presumption in case of disciplinary proceedings against student for using unfair means at examination that student proceeded against properly and without malice-Malice if alleged against authority of institution burden lies on student making such allegation-Malice if proved by production of evidence, burden shifts on authorities to establish charge on basis of evidence and such evidence to be recorded in student's presence-Student in such case to be afforded opportunity to cross -examine witnesses and to produce his own evidence in rebuttal- Action initiated against student not shown based on mala fides, quite proper, held, for authorities to proceed for violating rules providing fair opportunity to student to correct or contradict any relevant statement prejudicial to his interest and authorities under no compulsion to frame formal charge-sheet or to examine witness in student's presence or to afford him opportunity of cross-examining such witnesses. Disciplinary proceedings-Malice-Natural justice, principles of.P L D 1971 Lahore 972
AZHAR ALI — ‑Petitioner Versus THE CHAIRMAN BOARD OF INTERMEDIATE
Court:1982 S C M R 1171
Syed ABBAS ALI‑Petitioner Versus THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATION ETC.‑Respondents
Court: High CourtP L D 1976 Lahore 478
SHAHID MAHMOOD KHAN‑Petitioner Versus VICE‑CHANCELLOR, UNIVERSITY OF THE PUNJAB AND 4 OTHERS‑Respondents
Court: Regul. 13‑Giving or receiving assistance or copying or using other unfair means at examination‑Charge revealing offence as being only for possessing an objectional paper "from which he might have copied" and not that be in fact copied or was found copying‑university authority's comment filed in Court, however, showing examinee punished for actual copying and such finding based on some ost facto evidence‑Such evidence not shown to petitioner examinee harge‑sheet being different from finding ultimately recorded, file not lowing recording of any evidence or of any report of invigilators or any ther authority being put to petitioner in order to specifically explain (legations, disciplinary committee also not recording statement of any erson to explain the word "objectionable" as stated by examiner; sere showing of file to petitioner, particularly in view of lack of denial f petitioner's categorical statement that he was not shown any le, held, amounted to non‑fulfilment of even bare requirement of atural justice‑Whole process appearing to have been gone through i hasty and haphazard manner‑Penalty under r. 13, in circumstances, eld, not maintainable‑Impugned orders set aside, case remanded to disciplinary Committee for fresh decision in accordance with law fter giving proper hearing to petitioner‑Constitution of Pakistan 1973), Art. 199.P L D 1980 Lahore 176
SHAHID DAVID MALIK-Petitioner Versus BOARD OF INTERMEDIATE AND SECONDARY EDUCATION AND ANOTHER-Respondents
Court: Evidence Act (I of 1972), S. 138-Cross-examination, right of Petitioner candidate denying charge totally and raising a counter version but Discipline Committee not hearing Superintendent in support of his short report containing charge against petitioner candidate nor asking from him any question either in presence or behind back of petitioner in respect of plea raised by petitioner-Such course. if taken in presence of petitioner, petitioner .might have suggested some questions to committee or might have been allowed to cross-examine Superintendent and result might have been different-Right of cross-examination in such inquiries though not immutable yet depending upon circumstances of case same, held, could not be disallowed-Order of . Discipline Committee in circumstances declared to be suffering from an infirmity.-Cross-examination-Educational institutions.P L D 1975 Lahore 1385
ZAHID IQBAL RAZA‑Petitioner Versus TIE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS, UNIVERSITY
Court:P L D 1975 Lahore 257
RAHAT SIDDIQI‑Petitioner Versus BOARD OF INTERMEDIATE & SECONDARY EDUCATION, LAHORE AND ANOTHER -Respondents
Court:P L D 1970 Lahore 416
Malik ABDUL MAJID‑ — Petitioner Versus DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF THE PUNJAB, LAHORE AND ANOTHER — Respondents
Court:PLD 1996 Supreme Court 709
ABDUL JANAN ‑‑‑ Appellant Versus UNIVERSITY OF PESHAWAR .
Court: