SHAHID MAHMOOD vs CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATION AND Another
The petitioner challenged an order disqualifying him from appearing in three examinations for using unfair means, a decision upheld by the Committee of Appeal. The petitioner subsequently sought relief from the Lahore High Court, which, after examining the answer book and the report of the appellate committee, found clear evidence of tampering—specifically disturbed staples, differing ink and paper, and inconsistent handwriting—concluding the candidate had received outside help. The High Court declined to interfere with the factual findings of the domestic tribunal. Upon petition for leave to appeal, the Supreme Court reviewed the matter and affirmed the High Court's decision. The Supreme Court held that the High Court correctly exercised its discretion in refusing to interfere with the findings of fact made by the educational board authorities. The Court established that where a domestic tribunal has reached a factual conclusion based on a thorough scrutiny of evidence, such findings are not subject to interference in writ jurisdiction unless a clear justification exists, which was absent in this case.
- Can a High Court interfere with findings of fact made by a domestic tribunal in educational matters under writ jurisdiction?
- Is the physical evidence of tampering in an answer book sufficient to uphold a charge of using unfair means in an examination?
ORDER
1. NASIM HASAN SHAH, J: -The petitioner was disqualified by the respon--dent from appearing in three examination for using unfair means by the order communicated by the Deputy Controller (Examination) (respondent No. 1 herein) vide his order dated 14-1-1981. He then filed an appeal, which was dismissed by the Committee of Appeal on 23-1-1981. He then moved the Lahore High Court. The learned Judge in the High Court sent for the record and after thoroughly scrutinizing the relevant record passed the following order: - "I sent for the record and have today seen the answer book in the presence of the learned counsel for the petitioner. The answer book in Chemistry Paper shows very clearly that the staples had been disturbed and subsequently fixed. The colour of the inner leaves alleged to have been inserted subsequently as well as the ink used is quite different. Letter `b' used in some of the words has also been written in a different way. The report of the appellate committee, supports the position that the candidate solved the paper in question with outside help. The report reads as under: The candidate was heard in person. He could not repeat a word of any of the subjects in which he had copied or received assistance, lie is guilty and has rightly been punished, In view of the above I do not find any justification to disturb the finding of fact arrived at by the domestic tribunal."
2. This order was passed on 22-3-1981. This petition for leave to appeal is directed against the above said order.
3. We have heard Mr. Munir Ahmad Bhatti, learned counsel for the petitioner and are entirely in " agreement with the High Court that in the circumstances of the case noticed above there was no justification to disturb the finding of fact arrived at by the Board authorities and that this was no a fit case for interference in writ jurisdiction and that the petition was rightly dismissed.
4. No ground for interference, therefore, exists. This petition must, therefore, fail and is dismissed hereby.