' IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, C.J.--- This petition has been filed against the judgment, dated 12-5-2006 passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore.
2. Precisely stating facts of the case are that petitioner instituted a constitutional petition before the Lahore High Court, inter alia, praying that direction be issued to the petitioner to permit her to submit form and to appear in the 1st Professional (Composite) M.B.,B.S. Examination, 2005 and to issue her Roll Number Slip and to permit her to sit in the said examination. It is an admitted fact of the case that after having taken admission in the medical college respondent did not appear in examination during the period when the examinations were offered by the University and in this manner after non-availing four chances she was not allowed to submit admission form for the 5th chance, therefore, she had to file writ petition.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that according to the Calendar of the University as well as law laid down by this Court in number of judgments reported in Omer Naseer Muhammad v. Principal, Nishtar Medical College and others 2006 SCM R 695, University of the Punjab and others v. Mst. Samea Zafar Cheema and others 2001 SCM R 1506, Ali Yousuf and another v. Chairman of Academic Council and Principal, Dow Medical College, Karachi and others 2000 SCM R 1222, Rana Saeed Ahmad v. The Controller of Examination, Bahauddin Zakriya University, Multan 1996 SCM R 792 and Akhtar Ali Javed v. Principal, Quaid-i-Azam Medical College, Bahawalpur 1994 SCM R 532, a candidate who had not availed chances prescribed under the calendar is not entitled to claim any additional chance and according to him learned High Court's order granting permission to respondent to appear in examination for the 5th chance is contrary to the law laid down by this Court.
4. On the other hand learned counsel for the respondent contended that respondent got married, therefore, she was in family way as such failed to appear in the examination. Keeping in view the facts of the case request was made by her to avail 5th chance for appearing in the examination which was declined, therefore, under the circumstances she had to file writ petition and the High Court keeping in view the facts and circumstances had rightly granted relief to her.
5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the relevant pleadings. In the parawise comments submitted by petitioner in High Court, it is stated that respondent did not avail chances to appear in examinations 1st annual, 2003, 2nd annual, 2003, 1st annual 2004 and 2nd annual 2004. Reference has also been made to the University Calendar Volume II, 1998, Chapter IV Regulation 8, which states that if a candidate does not avail four chances he/she is not entitled to 5th Chance for the purpose of same examination.
6. The, above facts have not been controverter by the respondent. It is well-settled that as far as a candidate is concerned, he/she is supposed to take examination according to the prescribed rules and regulations of the University. If prescribed chances have not been availed then there is no scope for granting addition chance to such a candidate. In this behalf reference may be made to the judgments that have been relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
7. Thus, for the foregoing reasons, we are of the opinion that as for as respondent is concerned she is not entitled to avail 5th chance in the examination and learned High Court without taking into consideration the above provision of law as well as law laid down by this Court, granted relief to her.
8. The impugned judgment of the High Court is set aside. Petition is converted into appeal and disposed of. No order as to costs.