' MUHAMMAD NAWAZ BHATTI, J.---Brief facts leading to this writ petition are that on 26-4-2005, Miss Mehreen Zaidi, a student of Nishtar Medical College, Multan, filed a Writ Petition No.1436 of 2005, challenging the result of practical/viva conducted by the petitioner as inter examiner, wherein certain allegations were levelled against the petitioner and main contention of Miss Mehreen Zaidi (petitioner therein) was that the relation of her father, namely, Dr. Waseem Abbas Zaidi, were strained with Dr. Shamim Hassan on account of some administrative arrangements in Nishter Medical College Multan and for that reason, she had been declared unsuccessful. The petitioner refuted the allegations levelled by Miss Mehreen Zaidi and filed his written reply stating therein that he had no concern with the background of Miss Mehreen Zaidi and what had been awarded by the petitioner was related of the performance of Miss Mehreen Zaidi. During the course of arguments in the said writ petition, this Court directed Miss Mehreen Zaidi to withdraw her allegations levelled against the petitioner, therefore, the allegations against the petitioner were not argued and rules relating to conduct of the examiner were enlightened. The said writ petition was dismissed by this Court vide order, dated 19-4-2005. Meanwhile, Miss Mehreen Zaidi filed a representation before the Syndicate of University of Health Sciences, Lahore in spite of the fact that the said writ petition was pending before this Court.
' The Syndicate of University of Health Sciences Lahore in its 11th Meeting held on 5-5-2005 considered the representation of Miss Mehreen Zaidi and debarred the petitioner Professor Dr. Shamim Hassan to take any University Examination for a period of three years with effect from Supplementary Examination, 2004 on the ground that he was responsible for gross violation of the examination regulations of the University. Hence this writ petition.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that Regulation No.5(1)(i) of the Regulations of the University of Health Sciences deals with the appointment of the examiners, which is reproduced as under:-- "Internal Examiner is one who is teaching (or has taught for at least six months within two years of commencement of concerned examination) candidates for the particular subject (or part thereof) of examination for which he/she is appointed.
' That from a bare perusal of the said regulation, it becomes clear that a person who possesses the qualification prescribed in the regulation is eligible for the appointment as Examiner. The petitioner has prescribed qualification whereas no other person in his department is eligible for appointment to work as Internal Examiner that the respondents by appointing Dr. Tehseen-ul-Hassan Farooqi have violated the regulation mentioned above; that rule 5(i) has provided the criteria for disqualifying the examiner which is also reproduced as under:- "Any Examiner making a single deliberate error with mala fide intention shall be disqualified as an Examiner. An examiner, who more than twice makes errors, distorts or deforms the practical results, shall also be disqualified. The decision shall be taken by the Vice Chancellor on the recommendation of the Controller of Examination and the findings shall also be reported to Head of Institution of the Examiner and, if deemed necessary, to the Chancellor and Provincial Health Department.
' The said rule clearly indicates that any error made by the Examiner with mala fide intention shall be the reason for disqualification to work as Examiner. The decision given in the writ petition of Miss Mehreen Zaidi is sufficient to defuse the allegation of mala fide levelled by Miss Mehreen Zaidi; that to evaluate the allegations male by Miss Mehreen Zaidi, no enquiry was conducted by the respondents and even explanation of the petitioner was not sought by the respondents and that the decision arrived at by the Syndicate of the University of Health Sciences, Lahore is discriminative as the award list placed on file as Annexure-H was signed by both the Examiners (Internal and External) and both are responsible for making the result but the External Examiner has only been ornamented with a warning whereas the petitioner has been debarred for a period of three years.
3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents has supported the decision of the Syndicate of University of Health Sciences in its 11th Meeting held on 5-5-2005 and also the comments submitted by the respondents. He has submitted that the petitioner cannot claim himself to be appointed as examiner, therefore he has no locus standi to file the titled petition. In support of this contention, he has relied upon relevant provision of the Regulations of Examination of the University of Health Sciences which is reproduced below;-- "(2) Criteria for appointment.
(xviii) No faculty member of the affiliated College shall claim an inherit right to be appointed as Internal/External Examiners that in terms of Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, the petitioner could approach this Court only if no alternate and adequate remedy was available to him. The petitioner has neither made any representation before the competent authorities nor any petitioner under section 10 of the University of Health Sciences Ordinance, 2002; that the respondents have not violated any rules and regulations nor have caused any discrimination in any manner whatsoever towards the petitioner and that the respondents disqualified the petitioner in accordance with the regulations and in this regard, rule 3 of the Regulations of Examination is reproduced below:-- "(3) process of appointment of Examiner and Conduct of Practical Examination.
(xv) Vice Chancellor, on the recommendation of the Controller of Examinations, may disqualify for any specified period an Examiner who violates the conditions as laid down in the Regulations".
4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the record.
5. Perusal of the comments reveals that the petitioner has no locus standi to file this writ petition as he cannot claim himself to be appointed as examiner. In this regard, reliance is placed on rule 2 of the regulations of Examinations which is reproduced below:- "(2) "Criteria for Appointment (xviii) No faculty member of the affiliated College shall claim an inherit right to be appointed as Internal/External Examiners...."
' Even the petitioner has not made any presentation before the competent authorities or a petition under section 10 of the University of Health Sciences Ordinance, 2002. The respondents have rightly disqualified the petitioner and in accordance with rule 3 of the Regulations of Examinations, which is reproduced below:-- "(3) Process of Appointment Examiner and Conduct of Practical Examination.
(xv) Vice-Chancellor, on the recommendation of the Controller of Examinations, may disqualify for any specified period an Examiner who violates the conditions as laid down in the Regulations".
6. It is settled principle of law that this Court has no jurisdiction to disturb the schedule of examination while exercising power under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 as the matter pertains to the policy, which is prerogative of the respondents as per law laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court in the following Judgments:-
(1) Government of Pakistan v. Zameer Ahmad Khan (PLD 1975 SC 667) and
(2) Zameer Ahmad Khan v. Government of Pakistan (1978 SCM R 327).
7. In view of the above circumstances, this writ petition is dismissed.
8. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that the petitioner Dr. Shamim Hassan Professor of ENT Nishtar Medical College, Multan had filed a representation before the Chancellor, University of Health Sciences Lahore/Government of Punjab on 17-6-2005 which has not been decided till date. He, therefore, request that a direction be issued to the Chancellor of the University of Health Sciences, Lahore to decide the representation of the petitioner at the earliest.
9. It is settled principle of law that it is the duty and obligations of the public functionaries to decide the applications of the citizens keeping in view the parental jurisdiction as per the law laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court in Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education through Chairman and another v. Muhammad Younis (1998 SCM R 682). Therefore, the Chancellor of the University of Health Sciences Lahore is directed to decide the representation of the petitioner Dr. Shamim Hassan Professor of ENT Nishtar Medical College, Multan, dated 17-6-2005, within five weeks after receiving the order of this Court.