' Relevant facts necessary for the disposal of this Constitutional petition are that the petitioner Saadia Khanum, a student of F.Sc appeared in F.Sc. Premedical annual examination 1992 under Roll No, 233, and according to the result card issued by respondent, she was shown as fail in this examination, because she did not participate in both the practicals of her Chemistry paper, and appeared only in one practical of Biology and was absent in the second practical of Biology. The result card issued by respondent No, 1 (Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Bahawalpur) indicates that in the column "Marks Obtained' in the Chemistry paper, petitioner is shown to have obtained 116-A marks and in Biology paper 109-A marks, and the word "A" shows that the petitioner was absent, and thus, having failed in both the subjects, she was finally declared as fail in the full examination. In these circumstances according to the petitioner, she being eligible again applied to appear in her Chemistry and Biology papers, and was accordingly allowed to re- appear in annual examination 1993 under Roll No, 1785, and she qualified the said examination, but the result card issued by respondent No, 1 did not show the marks obtained by her in Biology paper in the later examination. It only revealed 109 marks which she secured in her previous examination.
According to the petitioner, she obtained 165 marks in Biology in her subsequent examination of 1993.
2. On 2-4-1994, petitioner submitted an application Annex "C" to the Controller of the Examinations, Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Bahawalpur respondent No, 2 for inclusion of marks which she obtained in her Biology paper under Roll No, 1785. On 7-5-1994 petitioner submitted another application, and the Assistant Controller Examinations has called for her explanation for having made changes in her result card earlier issued to her under Roll No, 233.
3. The main grievance of the petitioner was that in her examination under Roll No, 233, she had failed in both the Chemistry and Biology papers, and as such, she was entitled to re-appear in both these papers, whereas, the stand taken by respondent Board is that she had failed only in Chemistry paper, and had passed in her Biology paper. Thus, she could re-appear only in her Chemistry paper and not in Biology paper, and therefore, the marks obtained by her in Biology paper in 1993 examination could not be included or added to the total marks secured by her in the later examination, that is why, marks obtained by her in 1992 examination in her Biology paper have been shown as 109 on the result card issued to her in regard to her examination held in 1993.
4. To have a complete understanding of the controversy, it would be advantageous to have a glance of certain relevant rules available in the Calendar of the Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Bahawalpur. Rules 6(1)(2), 7, 10, 11 and 15 are reproduced as hereunder:-- (Chapter 2, Rules for the Instermediate Examination: Rule 6(1).--To qualify for the grant of the Intermediate Certificate a candidate shall be provided with a maximum of three consecutive examination opportunities in case he/she qualifies at least in subjects carrying 600 marks in the first attempt.
(2) A candidate who fails to qualify the examination in the first attempt, and is allowed to re- appear in the failing subject/s under sub-rule 6(1) above, after qualifying the examination shall be granted a certificate of having passed the examination "in parts".
Rule 7(a).--A candidate permitted to re-appear under Rule 6(1), may, at his/her own option be declared as "Failed" and treated accordingly for the purpose of re-examination if otherwise eligible.
Rule 10.--In order to pass in a subject, a candidate must obtain at least one-third of the total number of marks allotted to the subject, provided that--
(i) a fraction in the minimum pass marks shall be ignored; and
(ii) if a subject consists of theory and practical papers, it shall be compulsory to pass in both the components separately. Rule 11.--To qualify for the grant of the Intermediate Certificate, a candidate must pass in all the subjects offered according to the Scheme of Studies.
Rule 15.--A candidate who has passed the Intermediate Examination may, at his/her option, avail himself/herself of one opportunity to appear in full examination in the same Board for the purpose of improving the total number of marks obtained by him/her previously in all the subjects is within the same group/combination/subjects in which he/she has qualified the examination previously; provided that he/she must do so within a period of two years of the passing of the said examination; provided further that he/she has not appeared in any higher public examination held by a Board or a University during the above period; provided still further that he/she shall not be eligible for the grant of concessional marks as mentioned in Rule 13. Such a candidate if successful in improving the total number of marks shall be granted a fresh certificate of marks/grade on surrendering the certificate of marks/grade issued previously. A candidate as aforesaid shall not be eligible for the award of scholarship or any other academic distinction on the basis of the improved aggregate of marks.
(ii) A candidate will be given an option to improve his/her marks by reappearing in all/some subject/s in which he/she passed with grace marks at Intermediate level within two years before appearing in the next higher public Examination. No further chance will be allowed for the improvement of marks.
5. I have heard both the learned counsel at length, and have also seen the record produced in Court today on behalf of the respondent. It is manifest from the record that the petitioner in her previous examination held in 1992, obtained the marks in the following terms: Biology Paper I: Theory Paper II: Theory Total Marks Practical I Practical II TOTAL: -- 53 marks out of 75 marks -- 40 marks out of 75 marks 93 marks out of 150 marks -- 16 marks out of 50 marks Absent 109 marks out of 200
6. The assertion of the petitioner is that she had obtained only 16 marks out of 50 in the practical, therefore, she had failed in her Biology paper, because the requisite marks for passing a subject are 33% and the respondents are wrongly and illegally declaring her as successful in her Biology paper under Roll No, 233, and the result card in possession shows the correct picture, and that she did not tamper with it. Therefore, she was eligible to reappear in her Chemistry as well as Biology paper in the later examination held in 1993.
7. Rule 10 (1) of the Calendar of the Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Bahawalpur shows that a candidate has to obtain one-third (1/3) of the total marks to pass a subject, but the fraction in the minimum pass marks shall be ignored. Petitioner having obtained 16 out of 50 A marks in her practical in Biology paper in 1992 examination as such was declared as successful under this Rule. Otherwise, the pass marks would be 17 and three times 17 comes to 51, which is more than the total marks. I, therefore, hold that respondents correctly declared the petitioner to have passed her Biology paper in 1992 Annual Examination under Roll No, 233.
8. Learned counsel has further relied upon Rule 15 (ii) of the Calendar of the Board, referred to above, whereby, a candidate can improve his/her marks by re-appearing in all or some subjects in which he/she passed the 'examination with grace marks on Intermediate level within two years before appearing in the next higher public examination. It is argued that since she obtained 16 marks out of total 50 marks in the practical Biology paper in 1992 Examination, therefore, she will be deemed to have been declared as successful with grace marks, and as such, she could re-appear under Rule 15 (ii), as stated above.
9. I do not agree with this contention, because proviso (i) to Rule 10 of the Calendar of the Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Bahawalpur is very much clear, according to which, as mentioned above, a fraction in the minimum pass marks is to be ignored. Petitioner passed her Biology paper under that rule and not with grace marks. Furthermore, record also does not show that she obtained any grace marks. Students who want to improve their marks are governed by Rule 15 (i), under which, they may avail of one opportunity to appear in full examination in the same Board for the purpose of improving the total number of marks obtained by him/her previously in all the subjects within the same group provided that he/she does so within a period of two years of the passing of the said examination. A plain reading of the Rules, referred to above shows, that a student can re-appear under Rule 6 (ii) only in the failing subjects, and under Rule 7 those students are allowed, to re-appear who exercise their own option to be declared as "Failed". Obviously, the petitioner does not fall in any of these categories, and as such, could not re-appear in Biology paper, and the respondents had rightly not added or included the marks obtained by her in the Biology paper in her j second attempt in 1993 under Roll No, 1785.
' Upshot of the above discussion is that I do not find any merits in this petition, which is dismissed accordingly.