' MUHAMMAD ANWAR KHAN KASI, J.--- Through this C.P., the petitioner sought direction against the respondent-University for allowing her to appear in examination of 'Comprehension Paper" of MBA, scheduled on 31st of January, 2011 and viva voce.
2. The brief facts narrated in the petition are that the petitioner is a student of MBA in respondent- University uncle' Roll No,71, Session 2008-09 and retains good educational career. She already cleared three out of four semesters in Grade-B. On 24-6-2009, she appeared in the last paper of 'Marketing Research' of final semester and when she was compiling her answer-sheet, Ajmal Waheed, a department teacher alleged that she was using unfair means. After thorough inquiry, Chairman of MBA Department discharged her from the allegation and on 28-6-2009 she was declared as successful in said Paper. She was also allowed to appear in 'Comprehension Paper' to be held on 29-6-2009 at 10:00 am but again the said teacher restrained her from appearing in the paper upon which staff of the department explained that she was exonerated of the charge of UMC and then she was allowed to appear but with a delay of 40-Minutes. Feeling aggrieved by said treatment, she approached the University authorities, the Hon'ble Lahore High Court and the august Supreme Court of Pakistan for redressal of her grievance and after finalization of the matter, she moved the University through a written application dated 7-1-2011 seeking permission to take examination of 'comprehension paper & viva Voce', but remained un-. Responded, which necessitated filing of instant petition inter alia on the grounds :that due to mal-administration of respondent-University, the petitioner has suffered great loss to her studies as she has been deprived of her appearance in the successive examinations by withholding her result. Her precious time has been spent, on seeking relief from the superior courts and since her fundamental right to pursue her, studies has been violated, therefore, intervention of this Court has been sought.
3. The respondent-University in reply admitted that petitioner has cleared three out of four semesters in Grade-B; that she was subjected to UMC in which she tendered unconditional apology and was exonerated; she was given full time to attempt the paper and that she moved the University as well as High Court and august Supreme Court of Pakistan but remained unsuccessful to prove her version, therefore, she had no case at all.
4. Besides giving audience to both the sides, I, in order to ascertain as to whether the petitioner is entitled to relief sought in the instant petition, also examined the material placed on record including the Orders of the Hon'ble Lahore High Court and the Hon'ble apex Court of Pakistan.
5. The facts emerged are that initially on 24-6-2009, the petitioner appeared in 'Marketing Research' paper in which she was subjected to an unfair means case but the same was cleared and on 28-6-2009 she was declared successful in said paper and was also allowed to appear on 29-6-2009 in the paper of 'comprehension'. The real controversy starts from here when according to her she was not 'given full time to attempt the paper. She then preferred a Writ Petition before Islamabad High Court seeking direction against the respondents to announce her result regarding the papers held on 24-6-2009 and 29-6-2009. In said Writ Petition, the petitioner was allowed to appear in viva voce. Meaning thereby, that till that time the petitioner was not aware of the outcome of her paper in which she appeared on 29-6-2009. Subsequently, she preferred a Writ Petition .No,1486 of 2010 before the Hon'ble Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench with the prayer that the respondent-University be directed to announce the result of the petitioner regarding examination held on 24-6-2009 and 29-6-2009 at the earliest with further prayer that show-cause notice dated 16-7-2009 and proceedings of UMCC be declared illegal. It is mentioned in the order dated 8-7-2010 passed in said Writ Petition that petitioner was allowed to appear in viva test by the orders of Islamabad High Court. It is manifestly clear that petitioner came to know the outcome of her papers first time on 25-6-2010 when the copy of comprehension paper was produced before His Lordship Mr. Justice Khawaja lmtiaz Ahmad, at Rawalpindi Bench of Hon'ble Lahore High Court.
Said writ petition was dismissed by holding that the Court is not competent to ask University for enhancement of her marks. Against said order, she preferred a Civil Petition bearing No,1588 of 2010 before the August Supreme Court of Pakistan which was dismissed by refusing leave to appeal. The petitioner remained in litigation throughout and was not provided the result of her final paper till 25-6-2010 and now she preferred the instant petition with the prayer that she be allowed to appear in last paper and viva voce as her entire education career is at stake.
6. The above discussion of facts clearly leads us to the conclusion that after appearing first time, the petitioner remained unaware about the outcome of her examination till 25-6-2010 and was, therefore, unable to appear in the subsequent examinations. There is also no answer by the respondent-University as to what happened with the application of the petitioner dated 7-1-2001 whereby she sought permission to appear in examination. The contention of learned counsel representing respondent University that since the petitioner failed to prove her case in the earlier round of litigation up to the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan, is devoid of force for the reason that in earlier litigation she prayed for setting aside show-cause notice dated 16-7-2009 and declaring UMCC proceedings as illegal and her request for enhancement of marks was turned down.
7. Right to get education is a fundamental right guaranteed by the Constitution and the courts are under obligation to protect such rights. In the instant case, the petitioner hailing from far off place of Faisalabad in order to get higher education joined respondent University at Islamabad as Student of MBA and cleared her three semesters out of four in Grade-B. Through this C.P., she only prayed for permission to take comprehension paper scheduled on 31st January, 2011 and viva voce as she was not aware of the result of her earlier examination and her chances to appear went in vain due to litigation. It is pertinent to mention here that she had been exonerated of the charge and her appearance in the examination had become her right. Under the University rules she has six chances to appear in the examination but the result of her papers was not communicated by the University on time and it was declared only when the copies of papers were produced before the Hon'ble Lahore High Court on 25-6-2010, therefore, by no stretch of imagination petitioner can be held responsible for missing the available chances and her appearance in the examination on 31-1-2011 shall be considered as one out of six chances available to her under University rules. On this point I am fortified by Judgment of the Hon'ble Lahore High Court reported as "Muhammad Qasim Versus University of Agriculture, Faisalabad through Vice-Chancellor and 2 others (2010 CLC 54). Moreover, vide order dated 26-1-2011 she was provisionally allowed by this Court to appear in the examination of the 'comprehension paper' on the scheduled date i.e. 31st January, 2011.
7. In view of above discussion; I am inclined to hold that petitioner is entitled to relief sought for.
Since the petitioner has already appeared in comprehension paper' held on 31st January, 2011, therefore, the respondent-University is directed to allow the petitioner to appear in viva voce and to announce her result accordingly.
8. With above observations and directions, the instant petition stands disposed of with no orders as to costs.