' By this single order I intend to decide incant constitutional petition and W.P No. 6547 of 2015 as common questions of law and facts are involved in both these petitions.
2. Through these petitions under Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 the petitioners have prayed for a direction to respondents to allow them to appear in Bachelor of Eastern Medicine & Surgery Annual Examination, 2015.
3. Brief facts of the case leading to the filing of instant petition are that petitioners are students of Bachelor of Eastern Medicine & Surgery in different Sessions. They were refused to appear in the Annual examination commencing on 24.08.2015 due to shortage of their attendance in the lectures which was 70% to 72% and required attendance was 80%. It is alleged that said objection was not communicated to the petitioners at relevant time and that the students having 70 to 74.4% attendance have been allowed by university authorities to appear in the examination and thus the petitioners have been discriminated. It is further maintained that previously 70% attendance was reqefred and under the said impression the petitioners also achieved the target attendance but suddenly the university authorities have increased the attendance requirement from 70% to 80% without any prior notice or intimation to the students. The petitioners approached university authorities for redressal of their grievance but they flatly refused.
4. In response to the notice issued by this Court, the respondents submitted report and parawise comments in which they contended that Dean of a particular department has the authority to grant relaxation in attendance up to 5% on the reasons of illness, death in family and representing in university sports and debates, etc. The Vice Chancellor has also power to condone another 5% shortage of attendance in lectures. It is alleged that petitioners willfully absented from the lectures and no valid reason or plausible explanation was forwarded by the petitioners for their; shortage of attendance. Learned counsel appearing for respondent-university submits that the Syndicate in its 51st meeting' held on 05.09.2012 took decision that students having less than 80% attendance in one academic sessions should not be allowed to sit in the examination.
5. Arguments heard and record perused.
6. Admittedly, the petitioners have not brought on record any valid and cogent reason regarding their non-appearance in the university lectures. No medical certificate has been produced to show any serious illness refraining them to achieve required target of' attendance, On the other hand, the Syndicate of the respondent university in its meeting approved the requirement of 80% attendance in one academic year to qualify for appearance in the examination. The objection raised by respondents is in accordance with law and policy/rules introduced and approved by the competent authority. The respondents cannot be forced to go beyond the policy/rules and the student is also bound by the said rules, It is settled principle of law that a right to seek admission in an educational institution and to continue studies therein is always subject to the rules of discipline prescribed by, the institution and therefore a student who intends to pursue his studies in the institution is bound by such rules. Guidance in this regard can be taken from the cases reported as "Akhtar A.I Javed v. Principal Quaid-Azan Medical College, Bahawalpur" (1994 SCM R 532) and "A.I Yousuf and another v. Chairman, Academic Council and Principal, Dow Medical College Karachi and others (2000 SCM R 1222).
6. In view of the above discussion, these petition being meritless are dismissed.