Home Maxims & Terms Use of unfair means at examination meaning in Urdu
Legal Term Pakistani Jurisprudence Reference

Use of unfair means at examination

Use of unfair means at examination legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.

Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)

1981 SCMR 364 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent

Reglns. 13 & 18 read with Punjab University Rules, r. 20 (a)-Disciplinary proceedings-Use of unfair means at examination-Proof Natural justice, principle of-Student served with a detailed show cause notice, student replying to such notice in extenso and thereafter appearing before Disciplinary Committee and heard by such Committee in regard to allegations made against him, student in circumstances, held, cannot complain of no reasonable opportunity to defend him having been given.-[Disciplinary proceedings-Natural justice, principles of].

Sponsored Content / تشہیری مواد
How to cite this page: "Use of unfair means at examination", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/15171

Precedents & Case Laws citing "Use of unfair means at examination"

SCMR 1981
Civil Appeal No. 31 of 1972, decided on 2nd June, 1979.

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.
PLD 1981
Writ Petition No. 9061 of 1980, decided on 14th October, 1980.

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.
PLD 1996
Civil Appeal No. 810 of 1993, decided on 20th May, 1996.

PLD 1996 Supreme Court 709

ABDUL JANAN ‑‑‑ Appellant Versus UNIVERSITY OF PESHAWAR .

Court:
CLC 2010
2009-July-3

2010 C L C 95

MUZAFFAR ALI KHAN — Petitioner Versus BOARD OF INTERMEDIATE AND SECONDARY EDUCATION, LAHORE

Court: Lahore
PLD 2005
Civil Appeal No. 993 of 2002, heard on 4th January, 2005.

P L D 2005 Supreme Court 443

BOARD OF INTERMEDIATE AND SECONDARY EDUCATION, QUETTA through Controller of Examinations and others‑‑‑Appellants Versus YASIR ARAFAT and others‑‑‑Respondents

Court: Per Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, J; Sardar Muhammad Raza Khan, J. agreeing‑‑Majority view.
PLD 1988
Writ Petition No.129 of 1988, decided on 28thMay, 1988.

P L D 1988 Peshawar 99

SIKANDAR SADIQ and 2 others‑‑Petitioners Versus UNIVERSITY OF PESHAWAR and 5 others‑‑Respondents

Court: ‑‑‑ Examination‑‑Maxim‑‑Audi alteram partem (no man should be condemned unheard)‑‑Unfair means used in examination hall on massive scale‑‑Examination held on specified dates declared to be null and void by Authority‑‑Plea of examinees that before such action was taken by Authority they were not given opportunity of making their defence‑Validity of such plea‑‑Principle that no man should be condemned unheard to consequences resulting from misconduct and without allowing opportunity of making his defence, held, would not be attracted in a case where unfair means were adopted or, acts of indiscipline committed by all examinees in examination hall.‑‑Maxim.
SCMR 2000
Civil Petition No. 1750 of 1999, decided on 27th December, 1999.

2000 S C M R 1030

RAWALPINDI through Chairman and another — Petitioners Versus SEHR AZMAT and another — Respondents

Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan
MLD 2001
Writ Petition No. 19619 of 2000, heard on 8th February, 2001.

2001 M L D 936

Mst. FARAH‑UL‑MOMENEEN‑‑‑‑Petitioner Versus BOARD OF INTERMEDIATE AND SECONDARY

Court: Lahore
PLD 1988
Civil Petitions Nos.284/R and 285/R of 1988, decided on 2nd July, 1988.

P L D 1988 Supreme Court 638

SIKANDAR SADIQ and others‑‑Petitioners Versus UNIVERSITY OF PESHAWAR and others‑‑Respondents

Court: ‑‑‑University examinations‑‑Use of unfair means involving large majority of candidates and almost all the varieties of unfair means‑ University/Vice‑Chancellor, held, had ample power to annul the examination‑‑Such residuary power, even if it were conceded that no specific rule dealt with absolutely similar situation, would also be deemed to be inherent in the University‑‑Examinations, having been validly annulled in their entirety, question of the individual grievances of each examinee would not arise as in law there was no examination at all‑‑Result of annulment being that all the examinees had to appear again in the fresh examinations. p. 641 A
CLC 1987
Writ Petition No. 508 of 1972, decided on 27th October, 1972.

1987 C L C 891,

MAHMOOD AHMED Petitioner Versus CONTROLLER, EXAMINATIONS

Court: Lahore