Find a Lawyer

AYESHA AROOJ versus BAHAUDDIN ZAKARIYA UNIVERSITY

Article 199 Constitutional Application of the Constitution Low Result Malad Answer Sheets No special charge of bead was charged in the Constitution Petition Answer books were seen, none of these questions were dismissed nor said. It may be that there was a mistake or inaccuracy in marking the applicant when the question of re-review could not be construed in the constitutional jurisdiction. In the second attempt, he scored 27 points. In the number two and third attempt, he got seven out of every 200 marks which meant that the applicant was not interested in this article. The applicant did not file a case for re-evaluation of the respondent's books. Was deleted

Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2010

• MUHAMMAD RIAZ v. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE 2010 YLR 2267
• DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE v. MUHAMMAD JAMSHAID 2010 YLR 2272
• Dr. MUHAMMAD AMJAD v. S.H.O. POLICE STATION SECRETARIAT, ISLAMABAD 2010 YLR 2279
• MUHAMMAD YAR alias MUHAMMAD ALI v. MEMBER JUDICIAL-III, BOARD OF REVENUE, PUNJAB 2010 YLR 2287
• IRFAN AHMED v. State 2010 YLR 2301
• Mst. BALQEES BIBI v. MUMTAZ ALI 2010 YLR 2313
• USMAN LATIF v. State 2010 YLR 2320
• MUHAMMAD ZAHID v. Dr. MUHAMMAD ALI 2010 YLR 2327

All Lahore High Court Lahore judgments of 2010 →

immigration advocates from Pak Pattan Sharif lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes