' MUNIR A. SHEIKH, J.---The petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the order dated 20-10-1998 of a Division Bench of the Lahore High Court through which his I.C.A. No,335 of 1998 directed against the judgment dated 18-4-1998 of a learned Single Judge of the said Court by which his Constitutional petition against the order of the respondents of his cancellation of admission was dismissed, has been rejected.
2. The facts of the case in brief are that the petitioner applied for admission to B.Sc. Degree Course in Electrical, Mechanical and Civil Engineering on the strength of being B.Sc. With F.Sc. (pre- engineering) having passed B.Sc. Examination with Physics and Mathematics from the University of the Punjab, Lahore. According to the certificate issued by the Punjab University to the petitioner, the petitioner had passed the B.Sc. Examination in the year 1992 and secured 635 plus 20 marks of NCC i.e, total 655 out of 800 marks. The percentage comes to 81.875. He sought admission in the session 1994, therefore, with this percentage, he was found eligible on merit to get admission and was duly notified for the grant of admission and he deposited the dues and documents and started attending the classes. After the petitioner had passed second year examination when on 4-4-1998, a notification was issued which was despatched to him on 13-4-1998 stating that on verification from the University of the Punjab, it had been found that his result card was bogus on the basis of which he had managed to secure admission in the University in Electrical Engineering. His admission was cancelled and he was expelled from the University and his name was struck off from the roll with immediate effect. A criminal case has also been registered against the petitioner.
Feeling aggrieved% the petitioner approached the High Court through writ petition challenging the legality of the said decision of the University. The learned Judge in Chambers of the High Court summoned the original record in order to verify the correct position. It was revealed that according to award list, the petitioner had obtained 17 out of 50 marks in Physics-C paper and 36 out of 50 marks in physics Practical; thus, total marks obtained in these subjects out of 100 were 53 whereas in the result card, he was shown to have secured 35 and 41 marks, respectively in these subjects, and thus, shown to have secured total 76 marks in these two subjects. The difference was of 23 marks on account of which he managed to get admission in Electrical Engineering whereas as per merit position according to the marks actually obtained by him, he could not get admission in the said discipline. The learned Single Judge through judgment dated 18-4-1998 dismissed the writ petition.
3. I.C.A. No,335 of 1998 filed by the petitioner has also been dismissed by a Division of Bench of the High Court on the ground that the same judgment of the learned Single Judge through which on similar grounds writ petition of another student had also been dismissed was challenged before this Court and had been maintained.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the result card issued. By the authorities indicated that the petitioner had secured 76 total marks in the abovementioned two subjects instead of recording the marks actually secured by him according to award list which was an official act for which the petitioner could not be penalised. He attempted to argue that the petitioner is in no manner connected with the forgery made in the result card. He also maintained that according to the award list, 53 marks actually obtained by the petitioner, he could get admission in Mechanical and Civil Engineering as alternate choice indicated by the petitioner in the admission form which a student is required to do, therefore, he could not have been expelled from the University and should have been given admission in any of the two subjects.
5. We are afraid, none of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner has impressed us. The petitioner is the beneficiary of the result card in which the marks actually awarded to him in the award list had not been mentioned whereas 23 marks had been added to improve his position on merit and got admission in Electrical Engineering i.e,, the subject of his choice. The indication of the choice of other subjects comes later which could be considered by the authorities had the petitioner not found eligible for admission in the subject for which he had applied on merits. The petitioner by producing a forged result card misled the authorities and got admission in the Electrical Engineering which was rightly cancelled. If the petitioner wanted to seek admission in any other subject on the basis of merit as determined according to A the marks actually obtained by him, he should have made application afresh for subsequent sessions which he did not do.
6. The impugned orders of the High Court do not suffer from any legal infirmity, therefore, this petition has no merits which is accordingly dismissed and leave to appeal is refused.