'Instant Intra-Court Appeal under section 3 of the Law ReformsOrdinance, 1972 proceeds against the judgment, dated 28-9-2006 passed by the learned Single Judge in Chambers whereby Writ Petition No,4458 of 2006 filed by the respondent Muhammad Awais Rafique was disposed of with the direction to the appellants to offer the course of Database Management System and MIS to the respondent in case the same is being offered in Semester 8 currently subject to the payment of requisite charges and fee.
2. Brief facts succinctly required for the adjudication of this appeal are that the respondent filed a constitutional petition (W.P. No, 4458 of 2006) seeking a direction to the appellants/respondents to make arrangement for study of the course "Anthropology" of 4th Semester and for holding the examination of the respondent. Comments were sought and it was stated that the Course .Of Anthropology can be offered to the respondent/petitioner only with effect from January, 2007 when the next Semester is to commence. It was pointed out by the respondent's counsel that alternate course i,e, Database Management System and MIS is also being offered in Semester 8. The same was repelled by the appellant' counsel. Such a course was not being offered and if it is being offered, it is qua the MBA classes whereas at the level of BBA course is only offered since January, 2007. At this stage learned counsel for the respondent/petitioner under instructions from his client present in Court undertook at the bar that his client shall not claim any credit for the same towards the said MBA class and if allowed it will be treated only as alternate course for Anthropology and in view of the same, the learned Single Judge in Chambers allowed the respondent the said course of Database Management System and MIS being offered in Semester 8 currently vide his judgment, dated 28-9-2006. Hence this appeal.
3. It is argued on behalf of the appellants that the learned Single Judge in Chambers had failed to take into consideration that the course of Anthropology was introduced in the year, 2003 in BBA programme applicable to the respondent and thereafter this course was discontinued and no other course exists in the current Semester and the same was to commence from the next Semester starting from the 1st January, 2007 and an alternate course in lieu of Anthropology will be offered. It was further'stated by the appellants' counsel that the Semester Regulations do not permit to offer a special course in addition to the courses approved and offered in a Semester.
4. In view of the above, the learned Single Judge in Chambers was to follow the dictum of the august Supreme Court which repeatedly held that departure from the rules and regulations framed by the Educational Institutions should not be hampered which disturb the smooth running of the institutions. Reliance is placed on Muhammad Ijaz-ul-Haq v. Executive District Officer and others (2006 SCMR 989) and YahyaGulzar v. Province of Punjab through Secretary Health, Government of Punjab Lahore and 3 others (2001 CLC 9).
5. The learned Single Judge in Chambers has erred in law while directing the appellant University to offer the course of Database Management System and MIS course to the respondent which is being taught in MBA (IT) programme and MIS (Management Information System) course is offered in MBA (II) after completion of BBA programme as is apparent from the prospectus for the year, 2003. The course of Database Management System is a course of MBA (IT) programme and MIS course is offered in MBA (II) after completion of BBA programme which by no stretch of imagination can be offered to a student of undergraduate programme. Moreover, "business ethics" has been introduced in the fourth semester in lieu of Anthropology according to revised curriculum of the (H.E.C.) Higher Education Commission in Business Administration (Hons). In view of the same, the learned Single Judge in Chambers erred in passing the order, dated 28-9-2006 contrary to law laid down in Punjab Small Industries Corporation v. Ahmad Akhtar Cheema (2002 SCMR 549) and Muhammad Ilyas v. Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan and another (2005 SCMR 961).
6. On the other hand, it is argued on behalf of the respondent that in pursuance of the order, dated 28-9-2006 passed in Writ Petition No, 4458 of 2006 the respondent was offered the new course and has been declared successful as such precious right has accrued to the respondent which cannot be withdrawn. Reliance is placed upon Dr. Liaqat Ali v. Vice-Chancellor, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad and 2 others (PLD 1999 Lahore 454), in which it was held that:-- "It would be inequitable and harsh at such stage to adjudicate the entitlement of candidate for admission and give finding against him---Without touching eligibility of candidate for admission on merits, High Court allowed Intra-Court Appeal of candidate holding that admission and completion of study under interim order of High Court should be taken as legal".
7. In these circumstances, learned counsel for the appellants had stated that the appellants wish to pursue the appeal on the legal propositions as recorded in order, dated 17-1-2007 passed in this appeal.
8. We have given our anxious consideration to the above arguments:
9. The learned Single Judge in Chambers while giving the direction vide his order, dated 28-9-2006 has not been able to appreciate the dictums of the august Supreme Court of Pakistan in Punjab Small Industries Corporation v. Ahmad Akhtar Cheema (2002 SCMR 549) andMuhammad Ilyas v.
Bahauddin Zakariya University Multan and another (2005 SCMR 961), in which it has been held that:-- "Rules and regulations framed by the University Authorities for the purpose of conducting/regularizing its examination etc., were required to be interpreted by the University Authorities itself and Courts should avoid to interpret the same unless a case for grave injustice was made out, otherwise it would be difficult for the University Administration to run the internal affairs relating to examinations, etc."
10. Keeping in view the factum vide judgment, dated 28-9-2006 passed in Writ petition No, 4458 of 2006 by the learned Single Judge, the respondent who had joined new course, has been declared successful, as such precious right has accrued to the respondent, which cannot be disturbed at this belated stage and in this regard reliance is placed upon Dr. Liaqat Ali v. Vice-Chancellor, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad and 2 others (PLD 1999 Lahore 454), it would be inequitable and harsh to disentitle the respondent at, such stage, the High Court had allowed Intra-Court Appeal of the candidate, holding that admission and completion of study are legal, as such the status of the respondent cannot be disturbed. This appeal is disposed of with the observation that the Rules and Regulations for conducting examinations etc. Fall A within the domain of the University Administration to run the internal affairs relating to examinations, etc., as has been held in Punjab Small Industries Corporation v. Ahmad Akhtar Cheema (2002 SCMR 549) and Muhammad Ilyas v. Bahauddin Zakariya University Multan and another (2005 SCMR 961). Before parting with the judgment, it may be observed that the judgment in this appeal is not to disturb the status of the respondent but it is only to be treated as a precedent.