Pakistan Case Law← Search
PLD 1999 Lahore 454

Dr. LIAQAT ALI vs VICE-CHANCELLOR, UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURE,

CitationPLD 1999 Lahore 454
CourtLahore High Court
Judge(s)Ghulam Mahmood Qureshi, Malik Muhammad Qayyum
Result1.-C.A. allowed.

' GHULAM MAHMOOD QURESHI, J.--The appellant after passing his D.V.M. Course in 1996 from the College of Veterinary Sciences, Lahore, applied for admission in M.Sc. Course on 15-11-1996 in University of Agriculture Faisalabad. He obtained 2284 marks out of 3860 and the C.G.P.A. Is 2.59 in D.V.M. Course. The above said college is affiliated with the University of Agriculture, Faisalabad. The admission was denied to the appellant on the ground that he had failed to obtain his nomination from Northern Area. Where after he proceeded to Gilgit (Northern Area) to get nomination as a student from that area, which was issued to him on 21-3-1997. The appellant filed Writ Petition No.3000 of 1997 challenging the action of the University 'Authorities about denial of his admission, which was dismissed on 7-12-1998. Hence this appeal.

2. Vide interim order of this Court dated 11-2-1997 the respondent was directed to give the appellant admission on provisional basis. The said interim order of this Court was made subject to final decision of writ petition filed by the appellant. Finally the writ petition was dismissed vide order dated 7-12-1998.

3. Admittedly the appellant has completed his course. The learned counsel for appellant has relied on 1997 SCM R 1845 to contend that; in similar circumstances, Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan did not interfere to undo the admission. In the reported case the affected person had completed four years course of M.B.,B.S. Under interim order.

4. The learned counsel for the University has conversely contended that since the admission was allowed to the petitioner provisionally and was subject to final decision of his Constitutional petition, which was finally dismissed, therefore, the appellant cannot take benefit of interim order, when his writ petition has finally been dismissed.

5. Since the appellant was admitted under an interim order of this Court and has completed his study, at this stage, it would be inequitable and harsh to adjudicate the entitlement of the appellant for admission and give finding against him. Without touching his eligibility for admission on merit and respectfully following the dictum laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in above said case, we are inclined to hold that the admission and completion of study under the interim order of this Court should be taken as legal for that purpose. This I.-C.A. Is allowed. No order as to costs.

1.-C.A. Allowed.

Cited by 3 cases

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.
Disclaimer·Privacy·Terms·Search