Find a Lawyer

Writ Petition No.1776 of 1972, decided on 3rd August, 1973.

---Art.199--Educational institution--Natural justice, principle of- Violation of--Forged result--Proof--Evidence on record clearly showing that forged and fictitious result card of petitioner's examination was cancelled by Chairman, Board of Education after perusal of record and after affording petitioner full opportunity to explain his position--- Petitioner who himself did not bother appear before Authorities, held, could not legitimately complain that he had not been afforded reasonable opportunity to explain his position.--[Educational institution]

--- Admission in Medical College--Where matter of forged result card which admittedly was not issued by Board Authorities and on basis of which candidate got admission in Medical College, was referred to Board Authorities, in such case Board Authorities instead of cancelling such forged document, held, should pass order after hearing person concerned that such result card was not issued by Authorities and same had no legal existence--Person concerned could neither secure nor claim any benefit on basis of same.

---Art. 199 ---Educational institution--Admission in Medical College- Petitioner securing admission in Medical College on forged F.Sc. certificate- Candidate having already passed the requisite examination which formed basic qualifications for such admission was however, allowed to remain, in Medical College by High Court in spite of the fact that his forged certificate was cancelled--Considerations prevailing with High Court were that petitioner being a student of third Professional and Government having already spent a large amount on his medical education, he should not be plucked from his educational career.--[Educational institution].

Ahmad Saeed Kirmani for Petitioner.

Manzoor Ahmad Mirza for Board.

-Muhammad Suhail Malik, petitioner before me, complains that although he passed in the First Division the F.Sc. (Pre-Medical) Examination held by the Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education Lahore in the year 1968 and was admitted to the 1st year M.B.B.S. Class of the Nishtar Medical College, Multan, on merits yet he has now, when he is in the New IV year M.B.B.S. Class, been illegally served with a notice dated the 13th of December, 1972 to show cause why his name be not struck off the College yes Rolls, his College dues etc., fortified to Government and a case registered against him with the police, for the reason that his result for the said F.Sc. Examination had been quashed by an order of the Chairman of the Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education Multan on the ground that he had committed a forgery. According to the petitioner, in January 1970 he was served by the principal, Nishtar Medical College, Multan with a notice on the ground that he had obtained admission in the College by producing false documents. That notice was challenged by the petitioner by means of writ petition No.142 of 1970 which was dismissed as a premature proceeding. The petitioner further alleges that after dismissal of the writ petition when he approached' the principal of the College, the matter was dropped, and that it was in March 1971 that the Controller of Examinations, Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Multan, served on him a charge-sheet, but after perusing his reply he too felt satisfied and stayed his hands. Petitioner contends that once again a notice dated 12th of June, 1972 was served on him by the Controller of Examinations and despite the request made by him to extend the time for submission of his reply he was not communicated with reply till such time he learnt through the impugned notice dated the 13th of December, 1972 that his result of F.Sc. Examination had been quashed.

2. When the petition came up for hearing before me directed that the Chairman Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, should be asked to offer pare-wise comments. The petitioner was, however, allowed to take the Third professional M.B.B.S. which was to commence on the 27th of December, 1972, on the express condition that his result would not be declared till the disposal of the petition. The respondent submitted comments to which the petitioner also put in a rejoinder. I have also perused the entire record which was produced by a representative of respondent No.2.

3. The facts detailed by the petitioner in his writ petition and briefly stated in paragraph 1 of this order are not correctly borne out by the record of the Board. The true facts are that the petitioner appeared in the Intermediate (Supplementary) Examination held in 1967 under Roll No.8238 and secured 423 Marks. In order to improve his division, the petitioner again appeared in the Intermediate (Annual) Examination and was allotted Roll No.13185. These facts are clear from the Admission form which the petitioner submitted in 1968 under his own signatures Forman Christian College, Lahore was his Centre of Examination, and the record of the Centre reveals that against Roll No.13185 the petitioner had been signing the Identification sheets on each day of the Examination. His signatures on those sheets tally with those on the Admission Form and also on his affidavit attached with the writ petition. Instead of improving upon his Division, the petitioner unfortunately failed even to get through the Examination. But the matter did not end there. Apparently, in connivance with somebody in the Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education Lahore the petitioner succeeded in placing another Admission Form on record of the Board. Of that Form the petitioner did not fill in a single column correctly. He stated therein that he was appearing for the first time and not as, a candidate to improve upon his Division, and that the Roll Number under which he appeared in the Secondary School Certificate Examination in 1965 was 992. Upon this Form, Roll No.13949 was allegedly allotted. The Centre of Examination for this Roll Number was said to be Sahiwal and the result shown was that the candidate had passed by obtaining 639 Marks. The petitioner also succeeded in obtaining a result card and detailed marks sheet accordingly on the basis of which he obtained admission in the Nishtar Medical College, Multan. These facts were not true inasmuch as the petitioner was appearing for the second time in order to improve upon his Division Roll No.992 under which he alleged to have passed the Secondary School Certificate Examination; in 1965 was also incorrectly stated because under this Roll Number in the Annual Examination one Abdul Hasib and in the Supplementary Examination one Noor Muhammad appeared. The petitioner, in fact appeared under Roll No.32504 and was placed in Second Division, having secured 446 Marks. Roll No. 88992 mentioned in Certificate No.1 at the back of the Form was also fake one, because in the year 1965 the last Roll Number allotted was 81895. On his. Form bearing Roll No.13185 the petitioner had pasted the Bank Challan Receipt showing that the fee had been deposited by him on the 2nd of February, 1968. With the Form bearing Roll No.13949 no Receipt is attached, and though the petitioner mentioned to have paid fee under Habib Bank Challan No.55911, dated Nil, the record shows that no fee was ever deposited by any candidate under this Bank Challan Number. Moreover, Roll No.13949 under which the petitioner alleged to have appeared from. Sahiwal was never allocated to any of the five centres at Sahiwal. These facts are sufficient enough to prove that the petitioner had secured his admission in the Nishtar Medical College, Multan by misrepresentation based on documents which were not genuine.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the order of the Chairman whereby he quashed the result of the petitioner's F.Sc. A Examination has been passed without affording him an opportunity to explain his position or to be heard in person. Having perused the record, I find no substance in the contention.

The forgery on the part of the petitioner was for the first time detected by the Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education Lahore in 1969 and upon information therefrom the Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Multan informed the Principal Nishtar Medical College Multan on the 29th of October, 1969 about it, and requested him to strike off his name from the college Rolls. A notice was-accordingly served on the petitioner by the principal on 17th of January, 1970 which he challenged through writ petition No.142 of 1970 which was dismissed. The Board then issued him a charge-sheet on the 5th of November 1970 which was received back undelivered. Two charge-sheets, one on the 9th December, 1970 and the other on the 18th March, 1971, were then sent to the petitioner to which the did not send any reply. A press note was thereupon issued which appeared in the Daily "The Pakistan Times" dated the 21st of February, 1971. At this stage the petitioner approached the Board with a request to supply him a copy of the charge-sheet which was duly made available to him and he sent a written reply but did not put his signatures on the same. The record shows that it a good deal of correspondence exchanged between the petitioner and the Board and the latter was successful in obtaining a signed reply from the petitioner only on the 22nd of October, 1971. Between 6th of November, 1971 and the 20th of June, 1972 the petitioner was sent as many as six letters to appear before the Board to explain his conduct, but each time he sent intimation that he could not appear for one reason or the other, and sought adjournment. In these circumstances, the petitioner cannot legitimately complain that he had not been afforded a reasonable opportunity to explain his position.

I may, however state that something is cancelled only if it exists. If a thing, order or result does not exist, the question of its cancellation does not arise. It is the case of the respondent and it is also established by the facts on record which have been mentioned above that Roll No.13949 was never issued to the petitioner; that he did not appear from Sahiwal and that, therefore, it was a fictitious roll number. The petitioner had, in fact, appeared under Roll No.13185 from F.C. College, Lahore. The Result Card issued to him under Roll No.13949 showing that the petitioner had secured 639 Marks was also false document. The Board admittedly not having issued any such result card, the question of the Chairman cancelling it could not arise. The only order which was competent and should have been passed was that the result card showing that the petitioner has appeared under Roll No.13949 and had secured 639 marks was not issued by the Board and as such it had no legal existence. I have mentioned these facts so that the Board or the University authorities 'in such cases should not take upon themselves to cancel the result, but if they think that a person had obtained some benefit on'-the basis of a certificate or a degree which the University or the Board, as the case may be, had not issued, and the matter is referred to it, the authorities concerned should in such a case, after hearing the person concerned pass an order declaring that such a document had no legal existence and the person concerned could neither secure nor claim any benefit on the basis of the same. Thus, the writ petition cannot succeed.

5. Before parting with the case, I may observe that it is one thing that the Board has taken decision that the result card relied upon by the petitioner for getting admission in the Medical College was not issued by them, and it is quite another thing that the Medical College should take action against the student. The student in the instant case, had admittedly the basic qualifications for being admitted in the Medical College, i.e. F.Sc. (Pre-Medical). He had passed the F.Sc. Examination in the year 1967 under Roll No.8238 by securing 423 Marks. Indeed, he could not get admission on the basis of these marks placed as he was in the Second Division. But if he had been given admission it could not be said that he did not satisfy the basic educational requirement, the same being that he should have been F.Sc. (Pre-Medical). He has now appeared in the Third professional M. B.B.S., having already passed the first and the second professionals. By striking off the name of the petitioner from the College Rolls at this stage no benefit will accrue to any person. It is a common knowledge that each Medical College student costs the Government itself about Rs.50,000. The Government has on the education of this boy also during the last four years, incurred a considerable expenditure and after a year or so when he passes the M.B.B.S. Examination he will be able to serve the suffering humanity and the amount which the Government has spent on the education of this candidate will also not go waste. However, in saying so I any fully conscious of the fact that the petitioner has obtained the admission in the College by employing unfair and improper means, but I have made these observations only with a view to emphasising on the College authorities that simply because the Board has taken the decision they are not necessarily to follow the course of expelling the petitioner from the College and the principal, who has issued notice to the petitioner, may in his discretion, take his independent decision.

6. Subject to the above remarks this petition is dismissed. It wilt now be competent for the respondent Principal to decide the case of the petitioner in pursuance of the show-cause notice which he has already given to him.

H.B.T./S-82/L Petition dismissed

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.