' Through this appeal the Appellant has challenged the legality of impugned order dated 04.05.2016 passed in W.P. No,27617/2015 by the learned Single Judge whereby the Appellant's petition was dismissed being without any merit.
2. Learned counsel for the Appellant submitted that the impugned order is liable to be set aside on the grounds that the same is illegal and has been passed against the facts on record, that the learned Single Judge has failed to take into consideration the fact that the Respondents have acted in violation of regulations which were binding on them; that the Convener of the Assessment has not conducted any audit of the assessment made by the Paper Assessor, as such he has violated the Rule 4 of Appointment/Duties of Paper Assessors; that the career of the appellant is at stake and if the impugned order is not set aside and the directions are not given to the Respondents for enhancing the marks in Anatomy paper, the Appellant may suffer an irreparable loss.
3. Learned Law Officer vehemently contested the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the Appellant and prayed for dismissal of the appeal on the ground that there is no illegally or perversity in the impugned order; that the Court cannot substitute its findings over the assessm ents of experts in the relevant field; that the appellant has now developed his case by raising new points which have not been agitated before the learned Single Judge as such the appeal in hand is liable to be dismissed. Learned counsel for the University of Health Sciences has also contended that the instant appeal is not maintainable in view of the pronouncements of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan and has relied upon the case titled Muhammad Farooq Wajid v.
FPSC and others (PLD 2015 Lahore 457), Muqarab Akbar v. Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan through Registrar and 2 others (2006 MLD 1776), Abdul Hakim Hashmi v. Federal Public Service Commission through Chairman and 8 others (2002 SCMR 504) and Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education Lahore through its Chairman and another v. Mst. Salma Afroze and 2 others (PLD 1992 Supreme Court 263).
4. We have heard the arguments of both the sides and have perused the record.
5. Learned Single Judge in the impugned order has observed that that superior courts do not interfere in matters pertaining to marking of answer sheets by officers of colleges and universities who are expert in their field and this Court cannot substitute its findings for that of the persons skilled in their task. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in case titled Tahir Saeed Qureshi v.
Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Sargodha and others (1996 SCMR 1872) held that this Court cannot go beyond the scope of the prescribed Rules in constitutional jurisdiction.
Reliance can also be placed on the case titled Abdul Hakim Hashmi v. Federal Public Service Commission through Chairman and 8 others (2002 SCMR 504) and Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education Lahore through its Chairman and another v. Mst. Salma Afroze and 2 others (PLD 1992 Supreme Court 263). In the Abdul Hakim Hashmi' case supra the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan has held as under:-- "Re-checking/re-evaluation of answer book. The answer books are secret documents, which cannot be seen by the candidates or their representatives nor re-examination thereof can be allowed in any circumstance. The marking of numbers on the answer book was a technical job which High Court was not expected to undertake in exercise of its powers of judicial review under Art. 199 of the Constitution. The High Court in Constitutional jurisdiction, cannot go beyond the scope of prescribed Rules regarding re-examination/re-evaluation of answer books. The Supreme Court has disapproved the practice of summoning answer books by High Court in its Constitutional jurisdiction.
6. Furthermore, learned counsel for the Appellant has failed to convince us with co-gent reasons to set aside in the impugned order and to show any illegality or perversity in the same which warrants any interference by us. We agree with the impugned order as the same has been passed in accordance with law and the dictum laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan.
7. In view of above, the instant appeal, being devoid of any merit, is hereby dismissed.