Pakistan Case Law← Search
2013 CLC 512

MUHAMMAD ZIAURREHMAN and others vs UNIVERSITY OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY and others

Citation2013 CLC 512
CourtLahore High Court
Case No.Writ Petition No,1941 of 2012
Date2012-09-27
Judge(s)Ali Baqar Najafi
ResultPetition allowed
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This constitutional petition was filed by petitioners seeking directions to respondents to issue degrees of Bachelor of Science in Engineering from the University of Engineering and Technology (UET), Taxila, and register them with the Pakistan Engineering Council. The core legal question involved whether students admitted under a previously affiliated institution could be prejudiced in their degree issuance and registration due to a subsequent change of affiliation between academic institutions. The Lahore High Court held that the cancellation of provisional registration and altering the status of students without taking them into confidence was illegal, as the change of affiliation should operate prospectively and not prejudice students who studied with a legitimate expectancy. The court laid down the principle that students who pay dues and pass exams are entitled to protection of their academic interests, and any institutional deficiencies regarding standards can be addressed prospectively through additional tests or special classes rather than outright denial of degrees.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Whether the change of affiliation between educational institutions can adversely affect the vested rights and legitimate expectancy of enrolled students?
  • Can the provisional registration of students be cancelled retroactively without taking the students into confidence?
  • How should an institution address any disparity in academic disciplines or standards following a change of university affiliation?
constitutional petitionchange of affiliationengineering degreelegitimate expectancyprovisional registrationeducational institution

ORDER

' ALI BAQAR NAJAFI, J.--- The petitioners through this writ petition prays direction to respondents Nos.1 to 7 for issuance of degree of Bachelor of Science (Electrical, Telecommunication and Software in Engineering) by declaring their act as against law, discriminatory, ultra vires, void ab initio and without jurisdiction with a further direction to respondent No,8 to register the petitioners as Bachelor of Science in Engineering, being eligible.

2. The facts giving rise to this Constitutional petition are that respondent No,5, Army Public College of Management and Science (hereinafter referred to as APCOMS) opened admissions of session through publication, in Bachelor of Management and Bachelor of Science (Electrical, Telecommunication and Software) claiming to be affiliated with respondent No,1, University of Engineering and Technology, Taxila (hereinafter referred to as UET) recognized by respondent No,8/Pakistan Engineering Council. The petitioners took admissions, studied there and qualified the examination in May 2012 and at present claiming eligible to be registered as Engineer in Science (Electrical, Telecommunication and Software) with respondent No,8 as they have also paid affiliation fee amounting to Rs,11,500/- and UET registration fee amounting to Rs,3000/-. Hence this writ petition.

3. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners are being treated discriminatory as in the cases of similarly placed students the APCOMS issued the degree of Bachelor of Science (Electrical, Telecommunication and Software Engineering) from the UET but the petitioners have been refused without any rhyme or reason; that the APCOMS invited admissions in a specific field and the petitioners took admissions in response to the publication in the specific field with a firm understanding to receive a UET degree, therefore, the APCOMS is under obligation to issue the degree applied for by the petitioners from UET duly recognized by respondent No,8; that the petitioners approached respondents Nos.1, 5 and 8 number of times for redressal of their grievance but the respondents deliberately did not advert to their grievances.

4. This Court on 27-7-2012 directed respondents Nos.3, 4 and 8 to file report and parawise comments which have been submitted wherein it is stated that vide agreement dated 26-1-2011, the ,UET accepted the request of APCOMS for change of affiliation from National University of Modern Languages (hereinafter referred to as NUM L) to UET Taxila in October, 2010 and on the request of APCOMS the UET changed its affiliation with the understanding that existing batches would be transferred to changed criteria rather to change the position of students enrolled with the previous University, NUML. Further added in the comments that UET provisionally registered the students of B.Sc. (Electrical Engineering) of Fall, 2007, therefore, APCOMS administration decided that students of Fall 2007 entry shall remain on the roll of the NUML as they have been enrolled by that University and on the request of APCOMS vide letter dated 31-5-2012, the UET cancelled the provisional registration and refunded the registration fee to the APCOMS.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the records appended with the petition.

6. Admittedly, the affiliating status of National University of Modern Languages (NUML) was changed to University of Engineering and Technology (VET), Taxila, on the request of Army Public College. Of Management and Sciences (APCOMS) in October, 2010, vide agreement dated 26-1- 2011, whereby the then existing criteria of APCOMS was to be changed rather the status of the students. The students of Fall 2907, were retained at Roll of NUML and the provisional registration by UET was cancelled on 31-5-2012 which prejudiced the status of the students completing their courses with a legitimate expectancy to receive a UET degree. The changed criteria; whether with reference to syllabus or the standard of marking of the exams, had to be specified prior in time so that the students could possibly prepare themselves. I am fortified by a recent judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in case University of Karachi v. Tariq Hussain and another reported in 2012 SCM R 1694, wherein it is held t] at raising the objection on the eligibility of a student after the result snicks with mala fide as , it slept for about 2 years permitting him to pass the exams.

7. For a student (i) the payment of dues including the payment of affiliation fee for appearing in exams, and (ii) achieving required percentage is what is expected. Rest of the matters are undoubtedly the responsibility of the Institution where they are studying which is expected to look after their interest.

8. Even otherwise the cancellation of the affiliation dated 31-5-2012 was to operate prospectively; more particularly when the actual stakeholders i,e, the students, were not taken into confidence.

9. Since the Question of a requisite minimum standard of passing marks for the UE'I degree is involved, therefore, the respondent/UET is directed to identity (i) any discipline which was not studied by the student; of APC01 IS and, if there is any (ii) may put the students to an additional test, whereafter they may also be asked to attend the special classes for awarding the UET degree.

The said exercise shall be completed expeditiously and preferably within a period of three months.

10. With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of.

Cited by 3 cases

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.
Disclaimer·Privacy·Terms·Search