' NASIR ASLAM ZAHID, J.---We have heard some arguments advanced by Ch. Muhammad Farooq, learned Senior Advocate Supreme Court for the appellants and Rana Abdur Rahim, learned Advocate Supreme Court for the respondents, but then it was submitted by Rana Abdur Rahim, learned Advocate Supreme Court for the respondents, that in case another opportunity is granted to the respondents to sit in the same papers, subject-matter of the appeals, in the next examination of the University, respondents would not oppose the grant of appeal.
2. Learned counsel for the appellants has cited the following authorities for the proposition that, in the present case, where entire examination in the concerned papers were cancelled due to malfunction of the examination centres on account of large scale mischief, it was not necessary to issue individual show-cause notice to all the examinees:--
(i) AIR 1970 SC 1269 (Bihar School Board v. Subhas Chandra);
(ii) 1993 M LD 26 (Shabbir Husasin v. Chairman B.I. & S.E.);
(iii) PLD 1998 Pesh. 99 (Sikandar Sadiq v. University of Peshawar);
(iv) PLD 1998 SC 638 (Sikandar Sadiq v. University of Peshawar).
' The above judgments support the contention advanced on behalf of the appellant. We find that the impugned judgment of the High Court is entirely based on violation of the principles of natural justice, which principles in our view, were not attracted in present case. According to the report of the superintendents of the concerned examination centres, students and intruders entered into the centres duly armed with fire-arms and ousted the Superintendents and staff of the centres and confined them and extorted amounts of Rs,500 and Rs,1,000 from each of the examinees and allowed them to use unfair means to solve the question papers. In these circumstances we are of the view that no illegality was committed by the University in cancelling the said examinations and respondents' plea that they appeared in the said papers in a lawful and proper manner cannot be accepted. In such circumstances, where the whole examinations were cancelled, it was not necessary for the University to issue prior individual show-cause notices to the examinees before passing the orders cancelling the whole examinations in the concerned papers. As observed in such a situation, principles of natural justice were not attracted.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants has stated the another chance can be given to the respondents to appear again in the said papers.
4. As a tesult, the appeals are accepted and the impugned judgment of the High Court is set aside but with no order as to costs.
' Ch. Muhammad Farooq learned Senior Advocate Supreme Court for the appellants states that respondents can appear in the next examination of the Punjab University of B.A./B.Sc. In the concerned papers within the prescribed time. Learned counsel states that he will inform the authorities concerned that in case the respondents apply for appearing in the next examination on proper forms and within prescribed time they be allowed to appear in the examination.
' Statement of learned Senior Advocate Supreme Court for the appellant University is taken on record.