Brief facts out of which present writ petition arises are that the Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Lahore issued schedule for admission for the year 2001-2003 on 11-7-2001.
Muhammad Qasim Iftikhar and S.M. Tehreen got admission according to the schedule of the Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Lahore, in Islamia College, Civil Lines, Lahore. The aforesaid candidates selected computer science alongwith Humanity group. They submitted their admission forms through the aforesaid College as regular students to the Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Lahore. The Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Lahore, did not issue Roll Number Slips to the aforesaid candidates on the ground that the combination adopted by them in their admission forms, was not permissible in terms of the rules and regulations of the respondents. The father of Muhammad Qasim Iftikhar filed Writ Petition No.6877 of 2002 which was dismissed by the learned Single Judge vide judgment dated 3-5-2002. The petitioner being aggrieved filed Intra-Court Appeal No.384 of 2002 which was disposed of by the Division Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 10-5-2002. The respondents allowed the petitioner to appear in the computer subject alongwith subjects mentioned in the admission form by the petitioner at the time of submitting the admission form in Government Islamia College, Civil Lines, Lahore in Part I of Intermediate and Secondary Education. The said College sent registration return of the candidates to the respondent-Board. The petitioner appeared in all the subjects except the subject of history. The petitioner submitted his admission form of Part II mentioning the subject of statistics in Parts I and II of the Intermediate Examination which shall be held by the respondents in the month of April, 2003. The office of the respondent Board vide its letter dated 27- 2-2003 responded the principal that as per rules and regulations of the respondents, only those subjects can be opted in Part II Examination which has been opted in Part I and further requested to make correction of subject of statistics in the admission form so that office may Issue Roll No. Slip to the petitioner. The petitioner being aggrieved tiled this writ petition.
2. The learned counsel of the petitioner submits that respondent No.2 did not consider the case of the, petitioner under hardship regulation as directed by the Division Bench of this Court in judgment dated 10-5-2002, passed in I.C.A. No.384 of 2002. He further submits that the respondents-Board are duty bound being public functionaries to act in accordance with law. He further submits that respondent No.2 did not consider the request of the petitioner under hardship regulation as the petitioner had knocked the door of Court of law for redressal of his grievance. He further submits that action of the respondents is hit by Articles 2A, 8, 10, 14, 24, 25 and 178 of the Constitution. He further submits that this Court has ample jurisdiction to entertain the writ petition, where the public functionaries exercise their powers arbitrarily and mala fidely. He further submits that the respondents are responsible to ruin the career of the petitioner. He further submits that the respondents be directed to allow the petitioner to appear in the subject of statistics. He further submits that action of the respondents is without lawful authority.
3. The learned legal advisor of the respondents submits that Central Ministry of Education, Islamabad issued Notification dated 11-8-1997, wherein the computer studies was introduced at the intermediate level in the General Science Group only. In view of the aforesaid notification, controlling authority directed the respondents Board that students be allowed to opt the subject of computer studies in the following combination for the Academic Session 2000-2001:--
(i) -------
(ii) ------- (i.e) -------
(iv) The Humanities Group may also opt for Computer Science as an elective subject in any combination.
The office of the respondents-Board intimated to all the concerned Colleges in this respect vide Notification dated 19-2-2001. The Central Ministry of Education had withdrawn the facility of opting the subject of computer studies in Humanities Group and allowed to opt the Computer Science in General Science Group. The office of the respondents-Board intimated the aforesaid notification to all the heads of Secondary Schools and Colleges vide Notification dated 11-9-2001. The Principal of Government Islamia College forwarded the admission form of the petitioner for Intermediate Part I for the Annual Examination, 2002 in the office of the respondents with subjects of English (Elective), Statistics and Computer Science in contravention of the subjects as mentioned in Registration Return as English (Elective), History and Computer Science alongwith 51 other admission forms of Humanities Group. Office of the respondents --Board requested the Principal of Islamia College, Civil Lines, Lahore to solve the problem of the students with regard to the combination of their subjects. The Principal of the said Government Islamia College intimated the office of the Board vide letter dated 27-3-2002 that the students have agreed to correct the subject according to syllabus. The respondents-Board accepted the request of the students. The petitioner did not change his subject in the terms of the aforesaid syllabi and filed a suit before the Civil Judge 1st Class, Lahore. The respondents-Board filed an application under Order VII, Rule 11, C.P.C. Which was accepted vide order dated 16-4-2002. The petitioner being aggrieved filed Writ Petition No.6877 of 2002 which was dismissed by the learned Single Judge of this Court vide judgment dated 3-5- 2002. The, petitioner being aggrieved filed I.C.A. No.384 of 2002 which was disposed of by Division Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 10-5-2002. Thereafter, the petitioner filed Civil Miscellaneous No.597 of 2002 which was also dismissed by the Division Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 20-5-2002. Respondent No.2 Board in obedience of direction of D.B. Considered the case of the petitioner under hardship regulation and allowed the petitioner to appear in all subjects, which was intimated to the petitioner in the Registration return vide order dated 10-5- 2002. The petitioner did challenge the order of the Chairman dated 10-5-2002 and judgment of the Division Bench of this Court and judgment of the learned Single Judge, therefore, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed on the well known principle of res judicata. In support of his contention, he relied upon the following judgments:-- "Mirza Muhammad Yaqub v. The Chief Settlement Commissioner (PLD 1965 SC 254).
"Muhammad Akhtar Rana v. Special Tribunal, Punjab" (PLD 1977 Lahore 957).
"Abdul Majid and others v. Abdul Ghafoor Khan and others" (PLD 1982 SC 146).
"Atiq-ur-Rehman's and others v. Muhammad Ibrahim and others" (1984 SCMR 1469).
He further submits that the respondents did not pass any order against the petitioner in violation of their rules and regulations, therefore, the writ petition is not maintainable. In support of his contention, he relied upon "Chairman, Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Lahore and another v. Ali Mir" (1984 SCMR 433). He further submits that the petitioner concealed the material facts from this Court, therefore, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. In support of his contention, he relied upon "Nadeem Ahmed v. The Principal/Chairman, Admission Board, K.E.
Medical College, Lahore" (1985 SCMR 310). He further submits that this Court has no jurisdiction to grant the relief which is not permissible under the rules of the respondents. In support of his contention, he relied upon the following judgments:-- "Qamar-ul-Islam v. Institute of Chartered Accountants" (1997 CLC 1192).
"Fishermen's Cooperative Society Ltd. v. Registrar, C.S.S. And others" (1998 CLC 1285).
4. The learned counsel of the petitioner in rebuttal submits that the principle of res judicata is not attracted in the present case as the petitioner has challenged the action of the respondents qua the admission form submitted by the petitioner before the respondents-Board in Part II of Intermediate Examination, therefore, the petitioner is aggrieved by action of the respondents that the respondents did not issue Roll Number to the petitioner qua the admission form forwarded by the Principal of the Government Islamia College, Civil Lines, Lahore to the respondents-Board for Part II of the Intermediate Examination. He further submits that the petitioner approached this Court with clean hands and did not conceal any material fact from this Court. He further submits that this Court has ample jurisdiction to grant the relief to the petitioner under Article 199 of the Constitution.
5. I have given my anxious consideration to the contentions of the learned counsel of the parties and perused the record.
6. It is better and 9 appropriate to reproduce the following para. No.4 of the judgment dated 3-5- 2002 passed in Writ Petition No.6877 of 2002:-- "The father of the petitioner, in spite of above facts, has contended that the College permitted the study of the subject computer science alongwith English Literature and Statistics and the petitioner cannot be permitted to suffer. I am afraid this argument cannot be permitted to prevail. The Board has to proceed in accordance with its own rules, regulations and instructions. It has been shown that the Board has been repeatedly informing the institutions/students that w.e.f. 2002 Examination; the subject of Computer Science can only be studied alongwith the subjects available in General Science Group. If the college has acted differently, the Board cannot be held responsible. I, therefore, hold that the Board has not acted in any illegal manner warranting intervention by this Court. This petition has to be and is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs."
The aforesaid findings of the learned Single Judge was not set aside by the Division Bench of this Court in its judgment dated 10-5-2002 passed in I.C.A. No.384 of 2002. It is also admitted fact that the Chairman of Board considered the case of the appellant/petitioner in obedience of direction of the Division Bench vide order dated 10-5-2002 but the petitioner did not challenge the same before any higher forum. Action of the respondents is in accordance with Regulation 6 of Chapter 15 of the Calendar of Board, therefore, the writ petition is not maintainable as per principle laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in "The Chairman, Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Lahore and another v. Ali Mir" (1984 SCMR 433). The question of law between the parties has been finally decided in the aforesaid judgment of the learned Single Judge and in the Division Bench, therefore, the writ petition is not maintainable in view of section 11 of C.P.C., as per principle laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Pir Bakhsh's case" (PLD 1987 SC 145). It is settled principle of law that principles of C.P.C. Are applicable in f Constitutional proceedings as per principle laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Hussain Bakhsh's case" (PLD 1970 SC 1). Even otherwise the petitioner has alternative remedy to approach the Controlling Authority for redressal of his grievance, therefore, the writ petition is not maintainable.
With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of.