This judgment shall dispose of the following writ petitions as the common questions of facts and law are involved therein:-- Writ Petitions Nos.7426/95, 7577/95, 14012/95, 14013/95, 14024/95, 14398/95, 15059/95, 16083/95, 17883/95, 17885/95, 17886/95, 17887/95, 17888 of 1995, 271/96, 272/96, 273/96, 274/96, 275/96, 276/96, 277/96, 648/96, 649/96, 741/96, 742/96, 743/96, 744/96, 1294/96, 1448/96, 1487/96, 1488/96, 1760/96. 1817/96, 2117/96, 2118/96, 2119/96, 2120/96, 2121/96, 2122/96, 2123/96, 2124/96, 2125/96, 2126/96, 2127/96, 2128/96, 2129/96, 2130/96, 2131/96. 2132/96, 2133/96, 2134/96, 2135/96, 2136/96, 2137/96, 2623/96, 2723/96, 3573/96, 3982/96, 3983/96, 3984/96, 4169/96, 4170/96, 4171/96, 4172/96, 4173/96, 4587/96, 4588/96, 4852/96, 4854/96, 4856/96, 5331/96, 580'/96, 6670/96, 7126/96, 7134/96, 7141/96, 7143/96, 7176/96. 7288/96, 7343/96, 7344/96, 7345/96, 7346/96; 7347/96. 7348/96, 7349/96.
7515/96,8097/96,8652/96,8742/96,8744/96,11160/96,11161/96,11162/96. 11163/96, 11356/96, 11368/96, 11543/1996, 17176/95, 14019/95, 14071/95. 14023/95, 9301/95, 9302/95, 9303/95, 9304/95, 9305/95, 9306/95, 9307/95, 14020/95, 14022/1995, 15246/94 and 15465/19949308/95,9309/95, 9310/95, 9311/95, 9312/95,10289/95,12917/95, 14018/95.
2. In all the aforesaid writ petitions the petitioners were the students of various colleges. For the facility of understanding these writ petitions are divided into three categories. The first category covers the cases of those students who appeared in the B.Ed. Examination. Their writ petitions are at Serial Nos. 1 to 98.
3. The petitioners in the writ petitions of first category took admission in B. Ed. Class in the year, 1990 in different colleges for the Academic Session, 1990-91. The annual examination of the session was to be held in the year 1992 by the University of the Punjab but for some reasons the examination was delayed and was held during the months of June to August, 1993. The petitioners submitted application forms for the admission to appear in the Annual Examination of 1992 and claimed that they fulfilled all the conditions. However, the admission forms of students of the colleges, namely, Punjab College of Education, Lahore; Punjab College of Education, Rawalpindi; Punjab College of Education, Faisalabad; Garden College of Education, Lahore; Islamia College of Education, Faisalabad; Quaid-e-Azam College of Education, Lahore; Ibne Khuldoon College of Education, Faisalabad; Rawalpindi College of Education, Rawalpindi and Lahore College of Education, Lahore, were initially returned by the Punjab University on the plea that the Colleges in which the petitioners were studying were not granted affiliation by the University. However, subsequently, their admission forms were accepted and these writ petitioners were provisionally allowed to appear in the examination. Accordingly, all these writ petitioners appeared in the Annual Examination of B.Ed. Of 1992, held in the year 1993 but their result was not declared, therefore, they approached this Court through the aforesaid Constitutional petitions.
4. The second category is of those students who had taken admission in the Standard Law College, Sargodha. The writ petitions at Serial Nos. 102 to 118 have been filed by the students of this College who were studying in F.E.L. The writ petitions at Serial Nos.99 to 101 have been filed by the students of this college who were studying in L.L.B. Class.
5. All these students had appeared provisionally in F.E.L. And L.L.B. Examination held by the University of the Punjab. Their result has also not been declared by the respondent-University on the plea that the Standard Law College, Sargodha where they were studying was not granted affiliation by the University.
6. The third category from Serial Nos.119 and 120 is of those students who had provisionally appeared in M.A. Mass Communication. They had taken admission in the National College of Mass Communication in Post Graduate Classes during the Sessions 1991-93. As the National College of Mass Communication was not granted affiliation, the petitioners were also not allowed to appear in the examination by the University. They filed the writ petition at Serial Nos. 119 to 120 and in pursuance of the Court order dated 26-12-1994, they were allowed to appear in the examination of Parts I and II of the Mass Communication provisionally. By virtue of another order dated 17-9-1995, passed by this Court, the petitioners were also allowed to appear provisionally in M.A., Part II Mass Communication Examination.
7. In all the aforesaid cases, the writ petitioners took admission in B.Ed., F.E.L., L.L.B. And M.A. Mass Communication Classes in the aforesaid colleges when the matter of affiliation was still under consideration of the respondent-University. It was known to the general public as well as the I University Authorities that all these colleges had given admission to the students in the respective colleges and had started classes. The respondent-University by special or general order or a public notification did not inform the petitioners that they would not be allowed to appear in the University Examination unless the colleges were granted affiliation. Thus the University and the concerned colleges by their conduct and representation induced by the petitioners to take admission and led them to believe that they would be allowed to appear in the University Examination like other students of the affiliated colleges/institutions. Therefore, the students who had spent their precious time and money and also had completed the prescribed courses of study, should not be made to suffer because of the decision taken by the University subsequently or for any fault of the colleges.
8. The applications for affiliation of Punjab College of Education, Lahore, Rawalpindi and Faisalabad are still pending before the University Authorities. In some cases the result of some of the petitioners have been quashed after a long time by the Syndicate of the University. None of the affected students was given notice or opportunity of hearing to explain and defend himself. The applications for affiliation of the Garden College of Education, Lahore, Islamia College, of Education, Faisalabad, Quaid-e-Azam College of Education, Lahore, Ibne Khuldoon College of Education, Faisalabad and Rawalpindi College of Education, Rawalpindi have been rejected after many years of holding examination. Similarly, after about three years, the result of the students of these colleges was quashed by the Syndicate of the respondent-University. The Standard Law College, Sargodha, was initially given provisional affiliation by the University which is still intact and has not been withdrawn. Nevertheless the result of the students of this college who also are the petitioners before me have not been declared.
9. In the case of National College of Mass Communication, the affiliation was finally refused to the college in the year 1995 vide memorandum dated 18-2-1995, issued by the University to the college.
Simultaneously, the result of the petitioners who had appeared in M.A. Mass Communication Parts I and II Examination of 1991 was quashed. This action was taken against the students without any notice and affording opportunity to them. They were allowed to appear in the examination at a time when the matter of affiliation was not finally decided. Most of the petitioners; appeared in the examination provisionally under the order of the Court.
9. Learned counsel for the petitioners contend that the petitioners were discriminated inasmuch as the students of some other colleges, which were also not given affiliation by the respondent University, were allowed to appear in the examination provisionally and their result was also declared by the University. He has referred to letter issued by the University of Punjab on 10-7-1991 to the Principal, Standard Law College, Sargodha and letter dated 22-11-1992 addressed to the Principal, Urdu Law College, Lahore showing that the students of these colleges were allowed to appear in the examination and their result was also declared by the University although the matter of affiliation of these colleges had not by then been finally decided by the University.
10. The University Authorities ought to have decided the matter of affiliation of the Colleges in question before the admission was sought by the petitioners in the Colleges or in any case prior to submitting admission forms for appearing in the examinations or else the students should have been warned not to get admission in these colleges. Since this was not done by the University, they are estopped by their conduct and representation to withhold their result or~ to quash the same.
Reference in this regard is made to two reported judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in Federation of Pakistan v. Ch. Muhammad Aslam (1986 SCM R 916) and Pakistan v.
Salahuddin (PLD 1991 SC 546): In the latter judgment it was observed as follows: "The contention of the learned Deputy Attorney-General that the doctrine of promissory estoppel does not extend to legislative, executive or sovereign functions of the State is correct to the extent that it does not indeed extend to legislative and sovereign functions, but executive actions are not excluded from the operation of the doctrine."
No order as to costs.