IRAM JAVAID versus BAHAUDDIN ZAKARIYA UNIVERSITY, MULTAN
Article 199 Constitutional Application The Educational Self-Financing Scheme Applicant Who Denied Admission claimed that she was entitled to enroll in one of two sets reserved for women, one of two sets reserved for women. Seat was allocated for self financing The validity of the scheme If seats were to be allocated to the self financing scheme, they could either be constituted or in any case, taken from the general seats. And the quota allocated for women could not be allocated to finance because it was already a special quota and a method adopted by the institutions for improvement and to eliminate students' discrimination against women themselves. The idea of adjusting based on finance was fruitful. Because students who were eligible for admission on the merit were being denied admission, and candidates from economically better places who had not otherwise qualified on the merit for admission, were required to occupy seats. Permission was granted because changing the quota for women is illegal education for women. As important as the male students were, there was no justification for the authorities to allocate one of the two seats allocated for admission on the basis of funding for women, while the top candidate was listed. Was gone, while 5 out of the merit list for candidates from Serial No 2 did not choose to be enraged and the applicant who was the next candidate in the merit list had entrusted the candidates to the Coin Petitioner who was the next available candidate. Entry Right
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2010
