CLC
2005
2002-September-10
MUHAMMAD ISHAQUE — Appellant Versus RETURNING OFFICER and another — Respondents
Court: Karachi
PLC(CS)
2003
Writ Petition No.7033 of 2002, decided on 2nd September, 2002.
ABDUL LATIF and others Versus GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB and others
Court: Lahore High Court
YLR
2016
Writ Petition No.32898 of 2013, decided on 6th January, 2014.
TAIMUR ASAD KHAN — Petitioner Versus HIGHER EDUCATION COMMISSION and others — Respondents
Court: Lahore
MLD
2012
2011-September-21
TARIQ HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus UNIVERSITY OF KARACHI through Vice Chancellor and 3 others — Respondents
Court: Sindh
YLRN
2017
----Ss. 10(d) & 21---Attestation of degree---Duty of Higher Education Commission---Equivalence certificate, requirement of---Applicability---Powers and function of Commission---Power to make rules---Commission refused to attest petitioner's degree of Bachelor of Business Administration in Finance awarded by an Educational Institution on the ground that petitioner had not studied compulsory subjects like Pakistan Studies in his "A Level" and his said degree, therefore, could not be attested unless Inter Board Committee of Chairman (IBCC) had issued equivalence certification---Contention raised by petitioner was that he had obtained his degree in year 2003, whereas said requirement of obtaining equivalence certificate was introduced in year 2014, which could not be made retrospectively applicable to degrees obtained prior to year 2014---Validity---According to criteria given in prospectus approved by Board of Governors of educational institution for relevant academic year, there was no such requirement of obtaining equivalence certificate from IBCC---Petitioner had been awarded bachelor degree after he had duly fulfilled said criteria and completed all academic requirements---Higher Education Commission had been established for purpose of improvement and promotion of higher education, research and development under Higher Education Commission Ordinance, 2002---Under S.10(d) of Higher Education Commission Ordinance, 2002, Commission was empowered to prescribe conditions under which institutions, including those that were not part of State education system, might be opened and operated---If requirement of equivalence certificate was necessary for admission in bachelor program, same should have been prescribed and informed by Higher Education Commission to the educational institute at relevant time---Nothing was on record to show that Commission had issued any instructions to the institute in that regard---Petitioner had applied and obtained degree from educational institution keeping in mind criteria of admission given in its prospectus---High Court observed that case of petitioner was to be decided on basis of prospectus issued by the educational institution---Petitioner had merely sought attestation of his degree by the Commission and had not required its equivalence---Word 'attest' meant to affirm to be true or genuine---Commission was just to affirm whether degree of petitioner was genuine, which fact could be ascertained from the educational institution---Only material available on record were Standard Operating Procedure and application form for attestation of degree---Standard Operating Procedure was silent as to date of its operation---According to the application form for attestation of degree for year 2014, there was requirement of producing equivalence certificate from IBCC in case of 'O Level' or 'A Level', however, as per application form for year 2013, there was no such requirement---Petitioner had passed his graduation program in year 2006, and as such said condition could not, therefore, be made applicable to him by giving said requirement with retrospective effect---For any modification or alteration in admission policy of university or degree granting institutions and procurement of equivalence certificate issued by IBCC as part of admission criteria, Commission might frame Rules as required under S.21 of Higher Education Commission Ordinance, 2002 and notify the same in official gazette---Without undertaking such exercise, act of Commission declining request of petitioner or anyone else in future for attestation of his or her degree was illegal, arbitrary and without any lawful authority---High Court directed the Commission to attest degree of the petitioner---Constitutional petition was allowed in circumstances. [Paras. 8, 9, 10, 11 & 12 of the judgment]
SHER MUHAMMAD MAZARI — Petitioner Versus HIGHER EDUCATION COMMISSION OF PAKISTAN through Director Regional Center and another — Respondents
Court: Lahore
Haji NASIR MEHMOOD — Appellant Versus Mian IMRAN MASOOD and others — Respondents
Court: High Court
PLC(CS)
1991
Appeal No. 84(R) of 1990, decided on 24th September, 1990.
NAYYAR IQBAL Versus CHAIRMAN, WAPDA, LAHORE and another
Court: Federal Service Tribunal
PLC(CS)
2014
Writ Petition No.15063 of 2011, decided on 24th September, 2013.
MUHAMMAD ARSHAD TEJA and 10 others Versus CHAIRMAN TECHNICAL EDUCATION AND VOCATIONAL TRAINING AUTHORITY, LAHORE and 3 others
Court: Lahore High Court
Abdul Ahad — Petitioner Versus Punjab Public Service Commission and others — Respondents
Court: Lahore
SCMR
2018
Decided on 13th April, 2018.
MARIE-EVE MAGOON and another — Appellants Versus HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN — Respondent
Court: Supreme Court of Canada
