Find a Lawyer

ANWAR MAHMUD IJAZ versus UNIVERSITY OF THE PUNJAB

Failure to pass the M-section Thoracic Surgery Examination by the Punjab Region 6 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 199 Petitioner, Section 32 and 19 Calendars of the University of Punjab Act, 1973, missing part of the Response Book on specific question paper or The lost petitioner claimed to be entitled to the average of the numbers according to the first time in the journal 6, the calendar of the PU University successfully proved that some part of the response to the specific paper was lost or lost. And for this he deserves to be awarded the marks. Answers have been used on the missing pages that PETISER requested that the loss / damage was done before or after the assessment and that the respondent was, in fact, requesting a review before re-examining the response book. Acknowledged the disappearance of some pages in the response book. According to the Reg for the first time, Reg. First, the PU calendar said that out of the three exam papers, Petty Oner earned 60 and 62 marks in two papers, the average of the numbers for the third paper (some of which were Parts were missing) The average of the numbers in the controversial paper will come to 61 out of 100 refusal to give an average of 61 in the absence of any investigation by the Vice-Chancellor, rejecting the applicant's case through controller examinations. There has been a legal weakness that can only be solved by giving the applicant an average number. According to Reglin 6, the calendar of the PU University was neither his nor the concession petitioner was entitled to the average of the number he received in two other papers, which was 61p in the controversial papers. attorney vs advocate vs counsel from Buchay Key lawyer