' ROOH-UL-AMIN KHAN, J.---Through the instant revision petition, petitioner Malik Mohsin Sajjad, has called in question the legality and propriety of judgment and decree dated 17-6-2013, rendered by learned Additional District Judge-X, Peshawar, in Civil Appeal No,52 of 2013 whereby the judgment and decree dated 25-9-2012, penned by learned trial Court/Civil Judge in Suit No,227/1 of 2008, has been set aside and petitioner's declaratory suit has been dismissed.
2. The resume of facts, forming the background of the instant revision petition are that petitioner Malik Mohsin Sajjad filed a suit against the respondents/ University of Peshawar through its Vice- Chancellor and others, asserting therein that he being a regular student of Bachelor of Business Administration (BBA Hons), has right to attend the classes, participate in the examination and on abortive completion of the course by passing the examination, is entitled to get the Bachelor Hons degree. He seeks cancellation of notice bearing No,859/IMS dated 18-9-2008 vide which his admission has been cancelled by the respondents, being illegal, unlawful and without lawful authority. Mandatory injunction requiring the respondents to allow him to participate in BBA Hons, classes and examination and to provide Bachelor Hons degree on his success in the examination, has also been sought.
3. The suit was contested by the respondents by filing written statement, raising therein variety of objections, legal as well as factual. From the divergent pleadings of the parties, issues were framed by the trial court, on which the parties led their respective evidence. On conclusion of trial, the learned trial court, after hearing both the sides, decreed the suit in favour of the petitioner, against which, the respondents preferred an appeal before the learned appellate court, which was allowed, the impugned judgment and decree of the trial court was set aside, resultantly, the suit I was dismissed. Hence, this revision petition.
4. I have given my anxious consideration to the respective arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record with their valuable assistance.
5. The claim of the petitioner is that he being a regular student of IMS University of Peshawar has successfully completed three Semesters of BBA (Hons) and it was during his 4th/final Semester that his admission was illegally cancelled by the respondents on his back vide impugned notice dated 18-9-2008, without providing him an opportunity of hearing. The stance of the petitioner is vehemently controverted by the respondents by asserting that petitioner by providing his fake and forged education testimonials/antecedents, get admission in the University in BBA (Hons), therefore, is no more the student of the University and his admission has rightly been cancelled through the notice dated 18-9-2008, which has been issued after proper inquiry and a show-cause notice to the petitioner.
6. It appears from the record that petitioner was allowed admission as a regular student in Institute of Management Science (IMS) University of Peshawar for studying in class BBA (bons), who at the time of his admission provided a Detail Marks Certificate of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Peshawar (Session annual 2006) showing his marks as 864 (grade-A), which was, later on, sent to the concerned Board for verification, wherein it was found bogus. Computer Operator IMS University of Peshawar has recorded his statement as P.W.2. He produced notice inviting applications for admission in BBA (Hons) (Exh.P.W.2/2) and list of selected candidates as Exh.P.W.2/3. He testified that in the said notice, schedule of admission had been mentioned including scrutiny of original documents. He produced record of examination of BBA Hons of three semesters, in which the petitioner, after getting his-admission in the BBA, has participated and succeeded. He also produced final merit list of IMS candidates whereby no candidate with less than 800 marks, has been given admission in BBA (Hons). Muhammad Asim Clerk of BISE, Peshawar appeared as P.W.1, who produced DMC of the petitioner under Roll No,55049, for the. Year 2006, wherein he has obtained 599 marks instead of 864-A marks, as shown by him in his DMC through which he had succeeded to get admission in BBA (Hons). He deposed that DMC of the petitioner produced before the University with his admission form is bogus. He admitted in his cross- examination that the said bogus DMC of the petitioner has further been verified through BISE, which was found bogus, while responding to Letter No,934/IMS dated 16-2-2012, of the respondents. Both the detail marks certificates of the petitioner i,e, fake and original have been brought on record along with affixed photograph of the petitioner showing different marks in different subjects, however, with one and the same Roll number i,e, 55049. The original DMC of BISE Intermediate (annual 2006), shows the marks obtained by the petitioner as 599/1100, with grade-C whereas in the fake DMC, produced during admission the marks obtained has been shown as 864/1100, with grade-A. Thus, the petitioner being low in merit by committing fraud and forgery on University got admission in BBA (Hons) and participated in examination, of three semesters of BBA (Hons).
Petitioner himself appeared in the witness box and introduced some new story beyond his pleadings. He however, shifted the burden on the shoulder of the officials of IMS and deposed that his hard work for three years may not be wasted for the fault of officials of the University dealing with admissions. But in support of his claim, he failed to bring on record cogent evidence, documentary as well as oral. As against that, sufficient cogent and confidence inspiring evidence, documentary as well as oral has been brought on record by the respondents, which prima facie prove admission of the petitioner in -BBA (Hons) to have been obtained by committing fraud and forgery on the University.
7. It is borne out from the record that at the time of admission, the petitioner has sworn an undertaking wherein he has solemnly declared that the information given by him in the admission form is correct and in case of any wrong information/concealment of facts, and violation of the rules and regulation of the University, his admission shall be liable to cancellation, thus, the petitioner cannot resile from his undertaking. So far as the factum of completion of three semesters in BBA (Hons) is concerned, suffice it to say that admission of the petitioner was subject to furnishing his testimonials and the university was under legal obligation to verify the same from the concerned quarters. As stated earlier, the detail marks certificate of the petitioner, which has been made as base for admission in BBA (Hons), has been found fake, which would not saddled the petitioner with the accrual of any vested rights as well as mere admission on fake certificate, would not clothe him with a vested right nor can it be pleaded, particularly when the petitioner failed to demonstrate his eligibility for admission.
8. In a recent judgment, rendered in Writ Petition No,1554-P/2013, this court while dilating upon the menace of fake and bogus degrees, has observed that, the menace of fake degrees and certificates has travelled from Schools, Colleges and Universities to sacred institution of the Parliament, which should be curbed because whatever kind of seed we sow in the class room the manner in which we nurture it, and the strength which it imbibes in its various stages of growth, will all determine the harvest that the nation will reap in the form of its educated youth coming out of the schools, colleges and universities. The imprints of these institutions of learning will become indelible marks clearly visible in all fields of our national life; be it a clerk in Office, soldier in the battle-field, a school master, running the administration of the State or parliamentarian legislating for the running of affairs of the country. By now it has become a fashion and the germs of this communicable disease has penetrated in the blood of young generation and in future, the establishment of education department would not be in a position to stop the illicit business and promotion of fake degrees culture, without proper legislation from the parliament and providing stringent punishment for the errant, evil designer and holder of the fake degrees and certificates.
9. In this part of the land, the endeavor for getting the degree is purposeful and businesslike only to achieve a job. In our view, the degree awarded by a University is an asset of prime importance in an individual's life. The degree in a particular subject signifies the position of a student on a scale of intensity, amount or quality. It is a specific identifiable position in a continuum, series, especially in a process. It is in fact an award conferred by the college or University signifying that the recipient has satisfactorily completed a course of study. Vice versa circulation of fake degrees and certificates is a menace to the society and a serious threat to the integrity of both the certificate/degree holder and educational institutions that awarded the same. Therefore, there is a pressing need in pre-university institutions i,e, Boards of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Technical Boards and Universities to adopt a process that can ensure security of information and authenticity of certificates/degrees issued.
10. The argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner appeared and has qualified examinations of three semesters of BBA (Hons), therefore, deserve to be dealt leniently, is unpersuasive, because unduly tolerant view in the judicial proceeding on the basis of human consideration in regard to such excess on the part of the authorities, would create an adverse impression of justifying the wrong through court. In the judgment referred to above, this court has observed that the courts do and should take human and sympathetic view of matters that is the very essence of justice. But the tendency of this kind where advantage gained by illegal means is permitted to be retained, will jeopardize the purity of selection process itself, engender cynical, disrespect towards judicial process and in the last analysis embolden errant authorities and candidates into a sense of complacency and impunity that gains achieved by such wrongs could be retained by an appeal to the sympathy of the court. Such instances reduce the jurisdiction and discretion of courts into private benevolence. Such student shall destroy the fabric of the society and it is desirable that such students be weeded out from the education field, so as to create confidence in the faired deserving genuine students that the education imparted in this county is to being out honest citizen.
11. The admission of the petitioner was based on the DMC issued by the BISE, Peshawar. Such admission being provisional was liable to be recalled at any time, in case of fake and fictitious certificate. From the oral evidence produced by the petitioner/plaintiff and most particularly from comparison of both the DMCs, it is clear than crystal that the plaintiff/petitioner has committed fraud by getting admission through a bogus DMC. Neither in law nor in equity, relief can be granted to such errant, whose hands are sullied with improper conduct and against whom a finding of privy to and being beneficiary of fraud has not only been recorded by the Institution where he was studying, but also affirmed by a competent court of law i,e, the Additional. District Judge, Peshawar.
As observed above, any leniency in such like cases, would amount to encouragement of foul play and unfair means.
12. During trial, in his court statement, the petitioner/plaintiff while travelling beyond his pleading, introduced a new story by narrating that he got admission in IMS Peshawar University (BBA Hons) on the basis of donation of Rs,50,000 paid in cash by him to a Clerk of the University, I do not agree with the aforesaid stance of the petitioner, firstly, for the reason that it was not the claim of the plaintiff in the plaint and the innovation has first time introduced in his statement. It is settled law that the parties are not allowed to go beyond their pleadings and any such statement made during trial, would not be admissible, secondly, the petitioner/plaintiff has miserably failed to produce any receipt of the alleged payment made to the Clerk of the Department, thirdly, the said Clerk has not been examined in support the stance of the petitioner, and fourthly, the plaintiff could not substantiate from oral or documentary evidence the existence of any reserve seat under the category to be filled through donation.
13. I have compared both the Intermediate DMCs, available on the record, in the name of the petitioner, bearing one and the same Roll number for the year 2006, out of which the fake one has been exhibited before the trial court showing the marks obtained as 864 with "Grade-A" while the other i,e, the original, reveals the marks obtained as 599 with Grade-C. I have consulted the record which suggests that no student having less than 800 marks, got succeeded in getting admission in BBA (Hons) in the relevant year, therefore it is not appealable to a prudent mind that a candidate/student with 599 marks i,e, the petitioner, would have been given admission on merit basis.
14. For what has been discussed above, the learned appellate court by attending all aspects of the case and appreciating the evidence in its true perspective, has rightly set-aside the judgment and decree of the trial court and non- suited the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner has failed to point out any illegality or irregularity or misreading or non-reading of evidence in the impugned judgment of the learned appellate court which may call for interference of this court in its revisional jurisdiction. Resultantly, this revision petition being meritless, stands dismissed. No order as to costs.