Find a Lawyer

SAHIBA DOST versus CHAIRMAN ADMISSION BOARD/VICE-CHANCELLOR, UHS, LAHORE

Article 199 Constitutional Application The preferred order of admission policy at the educational institution Medical College was selected by only 3 of the 18 medical colleges, the candidate could not be on merit for the three medical colleges of his choice at the time of admission form. Therefore, it was not considered for other medical colleges and admission was lost. This was a policy issue and the university had to follow the policy formulated by its prospectus and if it failed to form a candidate, the candidates had to adhere to it strictly. The High Court cannot play the role of a policy maker in exercising constitutional jurisdiction; the candidate was not entitled to any arbitrary relief on the filing of the application form as per the instructions in the prospectus and / or the admission form was made by the candidate. Considering the clear cut in both the prospectus and the admission form, conscientious selection was irreparable;

Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2011

• Mst. NAHEED BASHIR v. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, SARGODHA 2011 MLD 599
• NASIR ALI v. UMAR DRAZ 2011 PLD 599
• IRFAN HAIDER v. State 2011 PCrLJ 604
• ASIA KANWAL v. VICE-CHANCELLOR, EAHAUDDIN ZAKARIYA UNIVERSITY, MULTAN 2011 YLR 604
• IMRAN AHMAD KHILJI v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN 2011 PLC(CS) 608
• ADEEL IQBAL v. State 2011 PCrLJ 609
• TRUST SECURITIES AND BROKERAGE LIMITED through Authorised Officer v. Dr. Syed SIBITUAL HUSNAIN 2011 CLC 609
• GHAFOOR AHMED BUTT v. Mst. IRAM BUTT 2011 PLD 610

All Lahore High Court Lahore judgments of 2011 →

pakistani advocates Bhalwal lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes