' CH. IJAZ AHMAD, J.---The brief facts out of which the present writ petition arises are that the appellant got admission in Government College for Woman Madina Town, Faisalabad in the year 1990. The appellant submitted her admission form to appear in the Annual Intermediate Pre- Medical Examination, 1993 as a regular candidate from the said college. The appellant was to appear in all seven papers but she did take four papers while in the remaining three papers she was absent. The examination commenced from 10th of April, 1993 and appellant was shown full fail in the result declared on 18th of August, 1993. The appellant being aggrieved filed Constitutional Petition No,2049 of 1993 with the following prayer:-- "It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that the Press Note dated 6-3-1993 affecting the petitioner in respect of Intermediate Examination held in April 1993 be declared to have been passed without any lawful authority and of no legal effect.
' The Chairman's failure to exercise the discretion in hardship cases be also declared having not exercised jurisdiction vested in him in judicious manner.
' Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court, under the circumstances of the case, may deem fit and appropriate may also be granted to the petitioner with costs."
' Writ petition was dismissed by the learned Single Judge vide impugned order, dated 22-9-1993, hence the present appeal.
2. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that according to the original rules attached with this writ petition as Annexure-A dated 19-2-1986, a student, to qualify for the grant of Intermediate Certificate, was to provide with a maximum of three consecutive examination opportunities in case he or she qualifies at least in the subjects carrying 600 marks in the first attempt. But the rules were amended just few days before the examination by the respondents on 6-3-1993 and according to the amended rules a candidate must pass all the seven subjects and he or she has to qualify at least five subjects in the first attempt in the Annual Examination, 1993. He further submits that a candidate who fails to qualify the annual examination and is allowed to reappear in the failing subject and shall be given chance only in supplementary examination. He further urges that a valuable right accrued to her earlier has been taken away in an arbitrary manner as earlier rules dated 19-2-1986 was in the field at the time of submission of her admission form for examination. In support of his stance learned counsel for the appellant has relied upon the case of Pakistan through the Secretary Ministry of Finance v. Muhammad Inayatullah Farukhi (PLD 1969 SC 407) as well as decision of this Court rendered in Writ Petition No,13305 of 1993 and Writ Petition No,15235 of 1993. He summed up his arguments that Board of Intermediate repealed existing rules few days before the examination through its Notification dated 6-3-1993 and the appellant before that date had already submitted her admission form for the examination, as such, the appeal of the earlier rules would not affect her case.
3. Learned counsel for the respondents has stated that the rules was deleted by the Board and final Notification was issued on 6-3-1993 before the holding of the examination in question, as such, the same was not available to the appellant. He also pointed out that this amendment was circulated to the Director of Education Colleges and Schools, all the Heads of the Education Institutions within the jurisdiction of the Board, Secretary of the Punjab Board, Section Officer (Boards) Education Department Civil Secretariate, Lahore. The Incharge of Radio Pakistan Faisalabad. The appellant has got no vested right in the mode of examination particularly so when the rules dated 19-2-1986 is no more in the field.
4. We have considered the contention of the learned counsel of the parties and have gone through the entire facts.
5. It is admitted fact that appellant got admission in the college in the year 1990 and submitted her admission form through her college in December, 1992. The respondents amended the rules on 6- 3-1993 and examination in question was held on 10th of April, 1993. It is almost settled law that Notification cannot be issued with a view to have retrospective effect in operation and to affect the vested right under the prior Notification. This view was expressed in the Division Bench case reported as Messrs Mardan Industries Ltd., Shahkot Malakand Agency and another v. Government of Pakistan and another (PLD 1965 (W.P.) Pesh. 47). It is also established proposition of law that an act of subordinate legislative authority cannot be applied retrospectively unless law confers power to do so, as per principle laid down by this Court in the case of Messrs M. Afzal & Sons and 2 others v. Federal Government of Pakistan through Secretary Finance and another (PLD 1978 Lah. 468) . The Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan has also considered the aforesaid proposition of law in the case of Commissioner of Sales Tax (West) Karachi v. Messrs Krud Sons Ltd. (PLD 1974 SC 180) and laid down the following principle:-- "It is well-settled proposition that a notification by the Provincial Government cannot operate retrospectively to impair an existing right or to nullify the effect of a final judgment of a competent Court even if the notification be expressly so designed."
6. In view of what has been discussed above, this appeal is accepted with no order as to costs. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.