Pakistan Case Law← Search
1981 CLC 1314

Miss TAUSEEF GILANI vs DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE AND 3 OTHERS

Citation1981 CLC 1314
CourtLahore High Court
Case No.Writ Petition No, 5042 of 1980
Date1980-05-17
Judge(s)Maulvi Mushtaq Hussain
ResultPetition allowed

' Miss Tauseef Gillani petitioner was served with the following charge-sheet under registered cover on 15th October, 1979 :- ' Two packets containing answer books in the subject of Special Pathology of Third Professional M.

B.. B. S. (Recent Scheme) Annual Examination of 1978 of the candidates who appeared in the Centre Fatima Jinnah Medical College for Women, Lahore on 4th September, 1979 were stolen from the office of the Internal Examiner Dr. (MRs,) Kishwar Zafar Moin. These packets were later recovered by the Police from the accused persons, who disclosed that they supplied your set of answer books to you to enable you to write answers to the questions set in the question paper.

' The set of your answer books 'in the subject of Special Pathology does not bear the signatures of the Deputy Superintendent of the Examination Centre where you took the examination. It is further alleged that you managed to have the continuation sheet (No, 134403) with written answers on it attached with your set of answer books in the subject of Special .Pathology, after the two bundles of the answer books in this subject had been stolen from the office of the Internal Examiner Dr. (MRs,) .Kishwar Zafar Moin. According to the record the continuation sheet was not issued to you in the Centre.. It has also been noted that you have crossed out certain answers in your answer books and reattempted the same. There is a lot of overwriting, additions and alterations in your answer books which indicate that you have re-attempted your answers after the , answer books had been stolen.

' You thus made deliberate previous arrangements to cheat in the examination which constitutes a misconduct, of a very serious nature.

2. The petitioner denied these charges and she was disqualified for a period of three years under Regulations 13 and 14. Both the punishments were to run concurrently and she was, therefore, not eligible to appear in any University Examination earlier than the Annual Examination of 1981.

3. The petitioner preferred an appeal to the Vice-Chancellor who referred the matter back to the Disciplinary Committee for re-consideration, The Committee decided to uphold its previous decision. Hence this petition.

4. The facts of this case are that one Kishwar Zafar Moin, Head of the Department of Pathology reported to the S. H.

0. Police Station Mozang that a theft had been committed in her office. She had received for packets of answer books, two of the Second Professional and two of the Third Professional of Pathology on 12th March, 1979 from the University of Punjab and kept them in her office in a steel almirah. At 9 p. m. She was informed by Dr. Madan that the father of one of the students has reported to her that the lower staff of Pathology Department had taken out Fourth Year answer books and handed them over to some of the students to enable them to re-write their answeRs, Dr. Kishwar went to the office with her husband and checked the contents of the safe. She found two of the sealed packets of the Third Professional Examination missing. She reported the matter to the Principal and after consultation with the Martial Law Authorities the matter was referred to the Police.

5. The Police investigated the case and some members of the lower staff confessed before the Police that they had made over certain answer books to a girl student by the name of Arifa who has said to have passed these answer books on to the petitioner and Bibi Noor Zada and two otheRs,

6. Noor Zada has also filed a petition and this order will dispose of both these petitions.

7. I sent for the Controller of Examinations who explained the whole matter to me and he has admitted that Arifa the girl who is supposed to have passed on the answar books to the petitioners and two thers, was not examined by the Disciplinary Committee. That being so, the question of her having been cross-examined by the petitioner does not arise.

8. By my order dated 2nd April, 1980 passed' in the file of, Bibi Noor Zada petitioner I directed the Controller of Examinations to convene-another meeting of the Disciplinary Committee and ask them to examine Arifa on the part played by her in the whole affair and give an opportunity not only to Bibi Noor Zada but also to the two other candidates for cross-examination. The Committee was to take a decision on the whole matter and report to this Court on 10th May, 1980.

9. The matter came up again on 18th May, 1980 and it was reported to me that Arifa had stated that she did not know anything about the matter and that her name had been mentioned mischievously. In fact, Arifa has filed an affidavit in which she has totally and emphatically denied the allegation that she had ever received any answer book of the petitioner.

10. In these circumstances the whole basis of the charge against these two girls as well as the other two who have been similarly dealt with disappeaRs, The petition has already been accepted by my short order dated 18th May, 1980 and these are the reasons for that.

For educational and research use only β€” not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.
DisclaimerΒ·PrivacyΒ·TermsΒ·Search