' ABDUS SATTAR ASGHAR, J Uzma Shahzad petitioner has invoked the constitutional jurisdiction of this Court to impugn the order dated 26-11-2011 passed by respondent No,1 whereby her name has been struck off from the school roll w,e,f, date of joining i,e, 26-10-2009 and she has also been declared as blacklisted and further directed to deposit a sum of Rs,181966/- received as stipend forthwith in the Government Treasury.
2. Succinctly relevant facts leading to this constitutional petition are that petitioner applied for admission in the Nursing Course at School of Nursing Bahawal Victoria Hospital, Bahawalpur. After adopting the prescribed procedure and fulfilment of codal formalities and on the recommendation of Departmental Selection Committee she was selected as Probationer Nurse for three years training course vide admission letter dated 20-10-2009. In the year 2011, when she was studying in third year, respondent No,1 restrained her to appear in the final examination and also refused to issue roll-number slip. Being aggrieved petitioner lodged a W.P. No,6171 of 2011/BWP before this Court seeking a direction to respondent No,1 to issue roll-number slip for the ensuing examination and also to allow her to attend third year classes. Said writ petition, however, was dismissed vide order dated 11-11-2011. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner assailed the order dated 11-11-2011 through Intra-Court Appeal before the Division Bench of this Court, however, on the request of the petitioner to withdraw the original writ petition the same was accordingly disposed of vide order dated 7-12- 2011. In the meanwhile respondent No,1 passed the impugned order dated 26-11-2011 assailed through this writ petition.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the impugned order dated 26-11-2011 is against law and facts, void, arbitrary, without due process of law, passed without any lawful authority by respondent No,1 being corum non judice, without legal effect against the rights of the petitioner and is liable to set aside.
4. On the other hand learned counsel for the respondents with reference to the parawise comments furnished by respondent No,1 argued that petitioner in her admission form for the Nursing Class had tampered her intermediate marks from 537 to 551; that respondents having come to know about the misstatement and tampering of the F.Sc. Marks by the petitioner got conducted an inquiry into the matter and on the basis thereof petitioner's name was struck off in accordance with law and that petitioner has no case to invoke the constitutional jurisdiction of this Court.
5. I have given patient hearing to learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record.
6. Perusal of the record transpires that respondent No,1 vide Letter No,1502 dated 13-10-2011 directed the petitioner to produce her original F.Sc. Examination certificate. The petitioner replied the said letter on 18-10-2010 stating that she has already submitted her original F.Sc. Examination certificate.
Consequently, respondent No,1 issued another letter to the petitioner bearing No,1968 dated 21-10- 2011 stating that the matter has been inquired and on scrutiny of the record it is found that petitioner increased her marks in her F.Sc. Examination certificate from 537 to 551 and got it attested from Mrs. Shahida Parveen Nursing Instructor of the said Institution to get the admission in the Nursing Course. Therefore, she was called upon to explain her position. Petitioner submitted her explanation/reply to the said letter on 25-10-2011 contending that at the time of admission she has submitted her original certificates for checking. She admitted that she had obtained 537 marks out of 1100 marks in intermediate (pre-medical group). Consequently, respondent No,1 reported the matter to the Principal Quaid-e-Azam Medical College Bahawalpur vide letter dated 27-10-2011 with the following prayer:--- "in the light of above facts this office is required to order a regular inquiry into the above quoted allegations against her for this purpose an enquiry officer or enquiry committee may have to be nominated for the sake of justice and she will be given full opportunity to defend herself. This office will take necessary action upon the recommendation of said inquiry officer/ committee accordingly, under the rules framed by the Pakistan Nursing Council and published upon the Admission form under the heading of conditions "Sharait".
' The above report is submitted for your kind perusal and necessary advice in this regard please."
7. The Principal Quaid-e-Azam Medical College/respondent No,3 pursuant to the above constituted a Fact-Finding Committee to conduct the fact finding inquiry vide order dated 31-10-2011 which reads below:--- "A Committee consisting of the following is hereby constituted to conduct the fact-finding enquiry.
An application of Mr. Waris Ali son of Ashiq Hussain, R/o Chak No,35/BC, Tehsil and District Bahawalpur along with comments of Principal School of Nursing, Bahawalpur is attached.
(1) Prof. Muhammad Sana Ullah Khan, Professor of Pathology, QMC.
(2) Dr. Altaf Hussain Malik, Additional Principal Medical Officer, BVH.
' Necessary report to the effect be submitted within 7-days, positively in the office of the undersigned."
8. The Committee submitted his report dated 10-11-2011 with the following recommendations:--- "RECOMMENDATIONS.
(1) Illegal admission of Mst. Uzma Shahzad student 2nd year should be dealt as per rules of Nursing School.
(2) Mst. Shahida Dost attested the forged photocopy of result card and also signed the merit list.
She should be proceeded under PEEDA Rules.
(3) Muhammad Ameer, Ex-Clerk Nursing School, Bahawalpur presently working in EDO Office Lodhran deliberately sent 537 marks for verification from the Board. He put the name of Mst. Uzma Shahzad in both the lists i,e, open and closed vide according to domicile she could be adjusted in open merit. He is recommended for major penalty and to be proceeded under PEEDA Rules."
9. On submission of above said report Principal Quaid-e-Azam Medical College vide letter dated 22-11-2011 directed the respondent No,1 as under:--- "To, The Principal, School of Nursing, Bahawalpur.
Subject:- ENQU IRY AGAINST MST. SHAHIDA DOST, MR. MUHAMMAD AMEER EX-CLERK, NURSING SCHOOL AND MISS UZMA SHAHZAD D/O MUHAMMAD SHAHZAD, STUDENT NURSING SCHOOL, BAHAWALPUR.
A Committee was constituted to conduct the fact-finding enquiry regarding the illegal admission of Miss Uzma Shahzad D/O Muhammad Shahzad in response to application of Mr. Waris All S/o Ashiq Hussain. The enquiry committee has submitted his recommendation that illegal admission of Mst. Uzma Shahzad, Student of 2nd Year Class should be dealt as per rules of Nursing School.
You are directed to proceed under rules as well as Honourable High Court direction without further delay."
10. Bare reading of the above quoted recommendations of the Fact Finding Inquiry Committee dated 10-11-2011 as well as letter dated 72 11-2011 issued by Principal Quaid-e-Azam Medical College addressed to respondent No,1 makes it crystal clear that respondent No,1 was directed that illegal admission of the petitioner should be dealt with as per Rules of Nursing School. At this juncture it will be advantageous to reproduce the relevant Rules and Regulations of the Nursing Educational Institutions 2000 as revised in 2001 which reads below:--- "4. DISCIPLINE POLICY AND PROCEDURE.
4.1 Responsibility for discipline.
' Responsibility for discipline is as follows: Principal in School of Nursing, ' Principal and Nursing Instructor in Hostels, ' Chief Nursing Superintendent and Nursing Superintendent in clinical areas.
4.2 Disciplinary action procedures are as follows: 4.3 Written complaint against the defaulter.
4.4 Chance of defence in shape of explanation in writing from the defaulter.
' Based on information from the defaulter, decision will be made by disciplinary committee whether it is a minor or major infraction.
' For minor infractions three written warnings will be issued; if there is no improvement then the case will be treated as a major infraction.
' For major offences the disciplinary action committee will adopt the following procedure: ' Inquire, statement of allegation.
' Show-cause notice. Charge-sheet.
' Final decision of penalty could be either: to put the defaulter 6 months back, or, termination from the education or blacklisted.
' Note: Cheating offences will be referred to the NEB and to the Unfair Means Committee.
4.3 Minor infractions/offences.
' Minor infractions/offences include punctuality, irregularities, absenteeism, defamation of the profession, breaking rules, damage of property etc. 4.4 Disciplinary committee for minor infractions V Principal/Senior Nursing Chairperson Instructor ' Two Nursing Instructors/Clinical Member Instructors.
' One member Services One member from Nursing from Medical Administration One member from the Student Member Executive Committee 4.5 Major infractions/offences ' Major infractions/offences include theft, malpractice, misconduct, sink,. Involvement in politics, unethical attitude with patients, addiction, suicide attempts, medication errors, cheating in examination, sex abuse, drug abuse etc. 4.6 Disciplinary committee for major infractions ' Principal Chairperson ' Chief Nursing Superintendent Member ' Senior Nursing Instructor ' One member from Medical Administration ' One Student from Executive Committee
11. In view of the afore-referred Rules it is crystal clear that termination/striking off from the Rolls of the School and declaring blacklisted amounts to major penalty. For imposition of major penalty a duly constituted disciplinary committee comprising Chairperson and Members is also bound to follow the procedure laid down under Rule 4.2 ibid. It is astonishing that respondent No,1 through the impugned order dated 26-11-2011 has unilaterally terminated/struck off the petitioner from the Nursing Training Course w,e,f, date of joining and has also declared her as black-listed without adopting the due process of law as contemplated in the above noted Rules. Respondent No,1 in her own capacity as Principal was not competent to impose the major penalty.
12. It is well-established that when law requires a thing to be done in a particular manner the same must be done accordingly and if prescribed procedure is not followed, it will be presumed that the same has not been done in accordance with law. It is evident on the record that in the instant case, due process of law is not observed. It is pertinent to mention that Article 10-A of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973 furnish fundamental right to every citizen of Pakistan to have fair trial and due process. Certainly a question of fact or liability conclusively presumed without having recourse to the procedural due process cannot be said to have 'been determined under due process of law.
13. In this case, respondent No,1 in her capacity as Principal while passing the impugned order acted as coram non judice. The impugned order, therefore, passed by respondent No,1 without lawful authority being void ab initio and ineffective as against the rights of the petitioner is untenable in law.
14. For the foregoing discussion and reasons, this writ petition is allowed and impugned order dated 26-11-2011 is set aside.