1. ' ALI NAWAZ CHOWHAN, J.---Syed Yasir Hayat Shah and eight others have challenged before this Court the working system of COMSATS, its alleged non-transparency with respect to their results and inaction on the part of the COMSATS in not giving answer to the parents with respect to the working of the students and most boldly what is stated is that Yasir Shah has been shown discrimination.
2. ' Briefly on the subject of discrimination a comparison of result has been shown vis-a-vis Ch. Hassan Barak-ul-Allah, Syed Amjad Ali Shah and Fehad Malik. These students were also reported unsuccessful in the 5th Semester. But it is said that the other with the exception of Hassan Barak- ul-Allah were allowed to continue in the 4th Semester and remove the deficiency in the knowledge of the subject. But Hassan Barak-ul-Allah was not given this privilege nor Syed Yasir Hayat Shah.
3. ' It was argued before this Court that a heavy fee is charged by this Institution i.e, above 32,000 per semester which is a heavy burden on the parents and it is the duty of the Institution that once it has inducted candidates for a particular semester, to keep a watch and vigil over their working and whosoever is not firm or is weak, to separate him and polish him through tutorial classes besides normal classes.
4. ' Learned counsel appearing for the Institution defended the Institution with respect to its standards. But this was a bald statement. Anyway, being not a person in academics himself, he cannot give any views with respect to the teaching methodology which is being employed in this Institution i.e,, whether it is following the rote method or the socratic method. He is also not able to tell whether teaching paradigms of the other prestigious universities were being followed for imparting the quality education and for which purposes this Institution came about.
5. There is never one way traffic with respect to the responsibilities and such institutions cannot shun their own responsibilities by only pointing out at the weaknesses of the students who do not make good grades after their induction in the institutions. The teachers owe an explanation requiring the performance of the students and Thus they are supposed to point out the weaknesses throughout a teaching tenure and not at the end or after the examination.
6. In prestigious universities, the students are also allowed to evaluate the performance of a teacher and this provides information to the governing body of an institution regarding the teachers.
7. Thus teachers are not given arbitrary powers any more. Their performance is kept under a watchful eye for ensuring perseverance. In case of those students who are chronic failure cases, this perseverance may fail. But they should explain this while keeping in view the recommendations allowing admissions.
8. After having said this Court feels that the matter be referred to the Chairman COMSATS, so that the learned Chairman holds a probe into the working of the teachers of the COMSATS, its examination system, the standard and quality of its curriculum and the need for ID having tutorials for those who need extra care.
9. There is an element of discrimination pointed out in this case which be also looked into by the learned Chairman while performing his parental role, the administrative role and role of a teacher.
10. ' The learned Chairman while performing what is stated above, shall also give a hearing to the petitioners and will see all their previous papers reflecting their performance.
11. ' The Chairman will then send us a report under his own signatures dilating on all what has been stated above and this will be sent within one month from' today.
12. ' A copy of the writ petition and a copy of this order be immediately communicated to the Chairman COMSATS by the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of this Court under a sealed cover registered A.D. Immediately.
13. ' The matter now to come up on the 13 of March, 2006.